Weekday Mass reflections - Year 1

These reflections have all been written by Fr Frank Doyle (1931-2011)

The author of the Living Space commentaries, Frank Doyle, an Irish Jesuit priest of the Chinese Province, died on Saint Patrick’s Day 2011. After some years working in Ireland, Frank had returned to Asia in 2010, undertaking work as a spiritual director in Manila. His requiem took place in Saint Ignatius Oratory, Loyola House of Studies, Manila on 22 March. May he be on God’s right-hand side.

Week 1 | Monday

Hebrews 1:1-6; Mark 1:14-20

Today we begin reading from the Letter to the Hebrews. Although grouped with the Pauline letters, it is clearly not written by him. The style is very different and it has the best Greek in the New Testament. The identity of the author can only be a matter of speculation. It is written more as a sermon than a letter but does seem to have been sent to a distant congregation, possibly in Rome. It seems to have been written sometime after 65 AD and perhaps around the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD.

Because of the extensive quotation from the Old Testament, the words are taken as addressed to Jewish Christians. The community addressed may have suffered persecution and there are signs of a falling away from the Church. Hence the letter emphasises strongly the role of Christ as the Way to God, a Way endorsed even by the Old Testament. There is the emphasis on faith and on Christ as the only High Priest.

The Letter opens with a magnificent statement of the role of Christ in the plan of God. In the past, God had spoken to his people in many different ways through the prophets. ‘Prophets’ here means all who spoke in the name of God and would include some of the patriarchs, such as Abraham, Moses and Joshua, some of the kings, especially David, and other leaders, as well as the prophets so-called.

Now “in these last days” God has spoken through his Son. The early Christians believed that the coming of Christ was a precursor of the final days and that all things would soon come to an end. As time passed, this conviction grew weaker and this can already be seen in later writings of the New Testament.

This Son is the “heir of all things” and, through him, we too become heirs to all God’s promises made to us through Christ. He is in a totally different category from any of his predecessors, being not just a messenger but the very Son of God. Through Him also were all the “worlds” created.”In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. . . All things came into being through him.” “Worlds” in the plural may refer to this world and the world to come or to the many heavenly realms through Christ ascended (Heb 4:14; 9:11).

The role of Christ is then beautifully described.”He is the reflection of God’s glory and the exact imprint of God’s very being.” In these two sentences we have the Sophia (wisdom) and Logos (word) metaphors. The wisdom is totally shared between Father and Son but the Son as Logos is made in some way distinct from the Father. He is the outward expression of that Wisdom.

Jesus as Word is the manifestation in human form of our God. Jesus communicates not just through what he says but through his action, through his whole being. When we see Jesus, hear Jesus, we see God and we hear God. When Jesus speaks, it is God who speaks; when Jesus acts, it is God who acts. And yet, because of his humanity, in Jesus we can still see God only, as it were, in a clouded mirror. He is the Way we follow to the fullness of union with God, something not to be experienced fully in this life.

“He sustains all by his powerful word.” He is the Wisdom of God. Jesus’ word is not just something spoken; it is a creative word, a making word. Through the Word all things were made. On a lower level our words too can be creative - whether it be through a speech than galvanises people into action, or through the ‘word’ of a visual artist or a great musician.

“When he had made the purification of sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high.” This purification was done through Jesus’ suffering and dying on the Cross. This happened when he “emptied” himself as a manifestation of God’s unchanging love for us, even though we were in sin and because we were in sin.

He sits now at the right hand of the Father, sharing fully in his power and glory as Son, and far exceeding the angels in status and dignity. He has a “name” far more excellent than theirs. That name is “Son”, an uncreated Son who has been with the Father from all eternity.

God also highly exalted him
and gave him the name
that is above every other name
so that at the name of Jesus
every knee should bend
in heaven and on earth
and under the earth (Phil 2:9-10)

The reading today concludes with a series of scriptural verses. These come mostly from royal psalms and illustrate Jesus’ supreme status as an equal with the Father far surpassing that of the angels. The once-humiliated and crucified Jesus has been declared God’s Son, and this name shows his superiority to the angels.

The reason for the author’s insistence on that superiority is, among other things, that in some Jewish traditions angels were seen as mediators of the Old Testament (see Acts 7:53; Gal 3:19). Jesus’ superiority to the angels also emphasises the superiority of the New Covenant to the old because of the heavenly priesthood of Jesus.

Today is an occasion for us to express our deep thanks to God for the gift of Jesus his Son. Because of him, we have a better understanding of how we are to live our lives and how to foster and deepen God’s image in us. We do this by our assimilating our human way of living to that of Jesus who is the Way.

GOSPEL (Mark 1:14-20)

Today we begin our readings from Mark’s gospel and we will be following him for the next several weeks.

Today’s reading follows immediately on the short accounts of Jesus’ baptism and temptations in the desert that Mark gives. It is the beginning of his public ministry. The reading consists of two main parts – a summary of Jesus’ teaching and the first response to it.

As the passage opens we are told that John has been arrested (the reason for his arrest will be given later). The word for ‘arrest’ is literally ‘handed over’, a key word which will be used later of Jesus himself, his disciples and indeed of many others down the centuries. The term is also used in our Eucharist when the celebrant at the consecration says: “This is my Body which will be given up for you.” Our translation of ‘given up’ represents the Latin word tradetur which literally means ‘handed over’. Jesus is daily handed over to us, or rather, he hands himself over to us and expects us to do the same for our brothers and sisters.

Jesus begins his ministry by proclaiming the Gospel, the Good News, of God. It is summed up in the words: “The time (kairos) has come and the Kingdom is close at hand. Repent and believe in the Good News.” It is a deceptively simple statement which, in fact, is rich in meaning. One can say that the whole of the Gospel message is contained in those two sentences.

We may comment on the following words:

kairos

kingdom

repent

believe in.

The time of fulfilment: this is a translation of the Greek word kairos. Kairos refers to a moment when something is ripe to happen, it is a serendipitous moment. And that exactly describes the appearance of Jesus, an appearance which the whole of the Old Covenant has been preparing for and leading up to.

The Kingdom of God is at hand: The whole of Jesus’ message centres round the idea of the ‘Kingdom of God’. It was the coming of that Kingdom which he proclaimed; it was the core of his teaching. Because of Matthew’s use of the term ‘Kingdom of heaven’, there is a possibility that we think of the ‘Kingdom’ as only belonging to the life after death. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The word ‘Kingdom’ translates the Greek word basileia an abstract noun which is better rendered as ‘kingship’ or ‘reign’. Kingdom here does not refer to a place. It points to the ruling power of God, a power based above all on love. Wherever the love of God prevails in our world we can say that the Kingdom is there. Love essentially involves other people so the Kingdom is not a place or an action but a complex of harmonious and interacting relationships. Jesus came to call every single person to belong to such a world.

We need to emphasise that the Kingdom and the Church or the Kingdom and Christianity do not coincide. The role of the Church is to be a sacrament of the Kingdom. It fulfils that role with varying degrees of success. There are Kingdom people everywhere, that is, people who base their lives on love and justice, on peace and freedom who are not Christians at all – but they are Kingdom people because their lives reflect the spirit of God. Similarly, mere membership of a Christian group does not guarantee one is a Kingdom person

Repent…: Here we have the basic steps needed to become fully a Kingdom person. First, we need to repent. This is the most common translation of the Greek verb of the word metanoia. It is not a very happy rendering. ‘Repent’ means for most people being sorry for something done in the past. That is not excluded here but metanoia looks much more to the future. Metanoia really means a radical change in one’s thinking, in this case, about the meaning and purpose of life and how that life is to be lived. Jesus is calling here for a radical conversion and to take on board his vision of life.

…and believe in the Gospel: And how is that metanoia to be achieved? By believing in the Gospel. For many Christians, belief means the total acceptance of the teachings of Christ as interpreted for us by the Church. But something more is asked of us here. We are asked not just to believe but to believe IN. It is one thing to believe something as true but it may not affect our lives very much. But in calling on us to believe IN the message that the Gospel brings, we are being asked for a total investment of ourselves and not just in accepting doctrines as true. We are being called on to living our lives and patterning them on the model of Jesus himself. Again, we will see what that entails as we go through the Gospel in coming weeks.

The second part of the reading gives us a dramatic example of some people who did just what Jesus was asking for. As Jesus walked by the Sea of Galilee, he saw Simon and his brother, Andrew, who were fishermen, casting their nets into the sea. They were doing their daily work. Jesus said to them: “Come after me and I will make you fishers of people.” There and then, they dropped their nets, their whole means of livelihood and went after Jesus. A little further on Jesus saw two sons of Zebedee, James and John, who were mending their nets. These two Jesus also called. They promptly left their father in the boat with his hired men and followed Jesus. Later Jesus will say, “if you love father, mother more than me you cannot be a disciple”.

Here we have that metanoia, that radical change of life, taking place. They follow Jesus with total trust. As they go off, they have no idea where they are going or what it will entail. They believe IN Jesus, put all their trust in him. They were to meet many trials and tribulations on the way but they never regretted the step they took. Only by following their example will we too have the same experience. The only guarantee we have is that those who did take Jesus’ call seriously and lived it out to the full know that they made the right choice.

Finally, we might say that this story is to be read as a kind of parable. Because we know that later on the disciples will still be in contact with their families and those boats will appear several times in the Gospel story. What is being emphasised here is the total commitment to the Way and vision of Jesus which is symbolised by the total abandoning of the boats and family members.

Week 1 | Tuesday

Hebrews 2:5-12; Mark 1:21b-28

Today we continue the discussion about the nature of Jesus. It seems clear that those to whom the sermon is addressed are having problems squaring the humanity and the suffering of Jesus with his position as Sovereign Lord and Son of God.

The author replies by emphasising the dignity of human beings in our world.”God did not subject the coming world to angels” but rather to men, or rather, to one Man. He quotes from Psalm 8:

What is man (anthropos) that you are mindful of him,
the son of man (huios anthropou) that you care for him?
You have made him for a little while lower than the angels,
You have crowned him with glory and honour,
Subjecting all things under his feet.”*

The psalm contrasts God’s greatness with our relative insignificance but also stresses the superiority of humanity to the rest of creation, over which we were given stewardship.

The “son of man” originally was simply a way of speaking of humans in general but, in this context, there is clearly a reference to the Son of Man - Jesus Christ. Some think the term, frequently used in the Gospel, comes from this psalm.

Although the human is put on a lower level than the angels, yet it is to humanity that governance of our world has been entrusted, “In putting all things under him he made no exceptions.” God left nothing outside humanity’s control. However, “at present we are not able to see that all things are under him”.”Him” here seems ambiguous - it can refer to humanity in general or to Jesus in glory. The first Christians, despised and persecuted, were still waiting for the coming of God’s reign on earth. Although Christ has already entered his glory, his reign on earth has to continue in time till he has conquered all his enemies when we will share in his full and final triumph.

But, the Son, who in his incarnation was - with the rest of humanity - made lower than the angels, is now crowned in supreme glory and honour precisely because of his sufferings and death. It was through his undergoing this experience that salvation came to the rest of humanity. By the grace and gift of God he “tasted death” for all of us. Christ was glorified because he suffered and his triumph seals the redeeming value of his death and guarantees unending life for us.

The all-powerful God, who is the source of all that exists, has brought many of his children to glory. He did this by making his incarnate Son, the “pioneer” of our salvation, perfect through his suffering. What seemed to the ‘Hebrews’ a stumbling block in their acceptance of Jesus is in fact what makes him their Lord. By dying and fulfilling the will of God, Christ becomes the one perfect Saviour, responsible for the entry of human beings into the glory of God.

And it is this which brings Jesus and ourselves united together under one Father, so that Jesus, though our supreme Lord, is “not ashamed to call us brother and sisters”. In support the author quotes from Psalm 22:

I will proclaim your name to my brothers and sisters,

In the midst of the congregation I will praise you (Ps 22:22).

What the author says here is something we have long become accustomed to accepting and yet it is indeed a deep mystery - namely, that the glory of God and our salvation should be brought about not just by God’s Son becoming one of us but that he should go through such terrible pain and humiliation. It was as John tells us in his gospel, “the uttermost proof of Jesus’ love” - and hence his Father’s love - for us (cf. John 13:1). So often, we see suffering as a punishment from God but, as is so clear in this text, very often it is in fact a source of grace. It was this the ‘Hebrews’ of the Letter found difficult to grasp.

With faith we know that it was fitting that God should make Jesus “perfect through suffering”, consecrated by obedient suffering. Because he is perfected as high priest, Jesus is then able to consecrate his people. If Jesus is able to help human beings, it is because he has become one of us; we are his “brothers” and “sisters”.

*The pronouns are all actually grammatically masculine in the original Greek but the word used for ‘man’ (anthropos) means a ‘human person’, man or woman. We might note also that in the Nicene Creed, the Latin text, speaking of the Incarnation, uses the inclusive word ‘homo’, the Latin equivalent of anthropos.

GOSPEL (Mark 1:21b-28)

Today’s passage is the first part of a day in the life of Jesus in which he carries out the main activities of his mission – teaching and healing. He goes to Capernaum, the centre of much of his work, and on a Sabbath day, like every observant Jew, goes to the synagogue. And, like any Jews who wishes to do so, he addresses the congregation.

He begins to teach the people. Much of Jesus’ work will consist of teaching, of communicating his message, his vision of life. People are deeply impressed because, unlike the Scribes, he speaks with authority. The Scribes could only interpret, give the meaning of the Scripture. Jesus spoke in his own right. Jesus speaks in the best tradition of the great prophets. But there is more. Jesus’ authority is empowering and liberating, it is not oppressive or subjugating. He will say in John’s gospel: “The truth will make you free.”

Right there in the synagogue was a man possessed by an “unclean” spirit. It was called ‘unclean’ because of its basic resistance to the holiness of God. This was a world where many unexplained symptoms in people were attributed to evil powers and were often believed to be the punishment for sinful behaviour. The spirit resented the presence of Jesus.”I know who you are: the Holy One of God”. It was believed that, by giving a hostile spirit its exact name, one could have power over him. But Jesus silences the evil spirit and tells it to come out of the man, who experiences a kind of fit and cries out.

Again the people are amazed at the power and authority of this man Jesus. He has new teaching and can give orders to evil spirits. The question is being asked: “Just who is this man?” It is a question that is the underlying theme of the first half of this gospel.

It for us to submit ourselves to the same empowering authority of Jesus, to listen to his teaching by steeping ourselves in his Gospel message and experiencing his healing and liberation in our lives.

Week 1 | Wednesday

Hebrews 2:14-18; Mark 1:29-39

Hebrews continues to emphasise the reality of the Incarnation and Christ’s total solidarity with peoples everywhere.

Jesus shares with us “the same blood and flesh”. In this way, as one of us he could offer his life in death to set us free from the power of death, namely the Devil. It is the power of evil which brings real death to people, a death that separates us forever from the love of God. By his own physical death and resurrection Jesus liberated us from the fear of that death from which there is no escape. That death comes when, through our self-distancing from God, we are caught in a world without life or love.

The Son in his humanity did not identify with the angels. Rather he took his descent from Abraham as did all his fellow-Jews. (And remember that this letter was being written for Christians who were Jews.) “It was essential that he should in this way become completely like his brothers and sisters so that he could be a compassionate and trustworthy high priest. . . able to atone for human sins.” There is one area, of course, in which he is unlike us - Jesus was totally free of doing evil or wrong in any form. It was precisely because of this that, while in every other respect one of us, he could be our intercessory priest and effectively plead with the Father on our behalf. It was only as one of us, though without sin, that he could offer a priestly sacrifice of atonement and reconciliation for all our sin.

And are we surprised at the next sentence? “Because he himself was tested by what he suffered, he is able to help those who are being tested.” When did Jesus become subject to temptation? We know that, after his baptism, he was tempted by the Evil One in the desert, although these temptations seem to be rather symbols of real testings later on. For instance, after the feeding of the 5,000, the people wanted to make Jesus king when the whole world would have been at this feet. He fled to the hills to pray to his Father. At other times, he was challenged to perform signs and miracles so that people would believe in him (parallel to jumping down from the top of the Temple and not being hurt). And, most of all, during his Passion when he was overcome with such fear that he sweated blood and begged his Father that he not have to endure his Passion. There is even the hint of threatening despair as he hangs on the Cross and cries out, “My God! My God! Why have you abandoned me?” (Matt 27:46). But this is immediately followed by words of total acceptance of the Father’s will - “Into your hands I surrender my spirit.”

Because of these experiences, which Jesus could only have had because he totally shared our human condition, he could empathise with the pain and sufferings which we also have to undergo. And he continues to empathise with us and, even in our greatest pain, he is not far away and his love is not far away.

Again, the author of the letter is writing this to show his readers that a suffering and dying Messiah, far from being a contradiction, is only a stunning manifestation of the extent of God’s love for us and that Jesus was indeed the Son of the Father. And, precisely because of his humanity, he both suffered as we do but also could be the effective intercessor on our behalf.

GOSPEL (Mark 1:29-39)

We continue from yesterday’s reading, following a day in the public life of Jesus. It was still the Sabbath and, after the synagogue service, Jesus now goes to the house of his two disciples, Simon and Andrew in Capernaum. (As it was the Sabbath, people could not go very far or do anything which could be labelled ‘work’.)

In the house Jesus finds Peter’s mother-in-law confined to bed because of a fever. When he is told about it, he immediately goes to see her, takes her by the hand, lifts her up and heals her. Immediately, she gets up and begins to serve them. This is not simply because that is the role of a woman in the home. Rather it is a way of saying that it is the role of the whole Christian – man or woman – to serve. Healing is not just to make one well but to enable one to become again an active, serving member of the community.

In the evening, once the Sabbath was over, people were free to move around. So large numbers come seeking out Jesus to be healed of their sicknesses and to be freed from the power of evil spirits.”The whole town was gathered at the door.” That is the door of the house where Jesus was. Many times we will see a reference to the “house” where Jesus is. It seems to be a symbol of the place where Jesus is gathered with those who are close to him, a symbol of a Christian community, of the church. When the poor and the sick and unfree no longer come to the doors of our community seeking healing and wholeness, we need to reflect on the quality of our Christian witness.

The following morning, Jesus leaves, goes to the hills to be alone and to pray. His disciples come in search of him.”Everyone is looking for you,” they tell him. Although there are many demands being made on him by the people of Capernaum, Jesus

a. needs time for himself to renew his spiritual energy and be in contact with his Father, and

b. has to think of the needs of other people as well.

Jesus may have been the Son of God but he could only be in one place at a time and, during those three years of public life, he really only reached a very small number of people. To reach the rest, he needed and still needs our help.

When Jesus returns from his prayer he does not go back to Capernaum, although there were certainly more people to be healed and helped there. Instead he went on to synagogues all over Galilee proclaiming his message of the Kingdom and making it a reality by healing the sick and liberating those controlled by evil forces.

This scene brings up the importance for us of availability. We do need to be available to all those who are in genuine need. At the same time, there is what we might call the ‘poverty of availability’. No matter how generous and self-giving we are we can only give so much. We need to find a balance between people’s needs and our limited resources. We do not help people by working ourselves to the point of ‘burnout’. We also need ‘quality time’ to be with God, to pray and to reflect on our priorities. Jesus gives us an excellent example here.

Week 1 | Thursday

Hebrews 3:7-14; Mark 1:40-45

As we have seen, one of the reasons for the writing of this Letter was to forestall the difficulties that some of its target audience, a community of Jewish Christians, were having in accepting Jesus Christ as Messiah and Lord. Today’s reading is a warning not to fall into the unbelief of which the Israelites were guilty of in the past. A large part of the reading is taken up with a quotation from Psalm 95:7-11 which is also the Responsorial Psalm for today’s Mass.

The author calls for a firm faith in Jesus. He bases his warning on the experience of Israel during the Exodus. In the Old Testament, the prophets (especially Isaiah) used the Exodus as a symbol of the return of Israel from their exile in Babylon. In the New Testament, the redemptive work of Jesus is seen as a new exodus. Jesus’ journey towards Jerusalem for his suffering, death and resurrection is described as a “going out” (Luke 9:31) and similarly for his followers who are called “go out” from a life of slavery to sin and unbelief.

So the author quotes from Psalm 95, which deals with a time during the long Exodus journey through the desert where the people were guilty of hardness of heart, of refusing to trust in God’s care for them, even though “they had seen my works for forty years”. The story is told in Exodus 17 and in another form in Numbers 20. The incident took place at Massah and Meribah. ‘Massah’ means ‘place of testing’ and ‘Meribah’ means ‘place of quarrelling or rebellion’.

The incident arose when the Israelites found themselves in a place where there was no water. They began to complain and abuse Moses for bringing them to such a place where there was only the prospect of dying of hunger and thirst. In complaining against Moses, they were also, in effect, complaining against God. Although angry with the people for their lack of trust, Yahweh tells Moses to strike a rock and water comes out from it. In the version of the story in Numbers, the focus is on Moses himself. He struck the rock not once but twice and this was taken as a lack of faith on his part. He was punished by dying before his people reached the Promised Land.

The readers of this Letter would have been very familiar with this story and with the Psalm and the implication is that, if they continue in their unbelief, a similar fate awaits them.

“Do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion. . . ‘Rebellion’ is actually a Greek translation of the place name ‘Meribah’.

“. . . as on the day of testing in the wilderness.” ‘Testing’ translates the Hebrew name for ‘Massah’. The event took place, as we saw, at Massah and Meribah.

And, because of their behaviour, “They will not enter my rest.” In the original psalm this referred to Canaan as Israel’s final resting place after their long trek. The ‘rest’ into which Israel was to enter was only a foreshadowing of that rest to which Christians are called. In tomorrow’s reading, we will see the deeper understanding of that ‘rest’.

In the final sentences, the author turns directly to the ‘Hebrews’ and warns them against similar forms of unbelief and turning away from the “living” God. To call God “living” means that he reveals himself in his works. Instead they are to be an encouragement to each other “as long as it is called ‘Today’”, so that none of them may be deceived by the allure of actions which are, in fact, sinful and wrong.”Today” indicates that it is still the day of God’s grace and an opportunity to express our trust in God. It will not last forever. The day of reckoning will come and then it will be too late. God is to be found, loved and served in the Now.

In a final lovely remark he reminds them that they have become “partners of Christ” and he begs them to hold on to the strong faith they had at the beginning of their conversion.

The reading touches on three periods: the rebellion of the Israelites against Moses and Yahweh in the desert, the weakening faith of the Jewish Christians to whom the sermon was delivered and, finally, our own experience now. The advice of the reading is as relevant to us Christians today as it was to the Hebrews for whom it was written.

GOSPEL (Mark 1:40-45)

This healing story does not actually belong to that “Day in the life of Jesus” which we reflected on over the past two days.

Lepers were among the most piteous of people in scriptural times. Although little was known of the origin of the sickness, it was clearly known to be contagious and therefore greatly feared. The only solution was to isolate the victim and not allow him/her to approach people. So, apart from the appalling physical disintegration of body and limbs, there was the social ostracism, the contempt and the fear which the victim engendered.

What was probably even more tragic was that many who were branded as lepers were suffering from some other ailment, which may not have been contagious at all – such as ulcers, cancer or other skin diseases (some of them perhaps purely psychosomatic). The signs for diagnosis are given in chapter 13 of the Book of Leviticus and, by our standards today, are rather primitive indeed. The room for a wrong diagnosis was huge. It was a question of being safe rather than sorry.

The leper in the story indicates his great faith and trust in Jesus, a necessary and sufficient condition for healing in the Gospel.”If you wish, you can make me clean,” he says. He knows this because he has undoubtedly seen or heard of what others have experienced.

Jesus is filled with a deep sense of compassion for the man’s plight. Highlighting the emotional feelings of Jesus is a characteristic of Mark’s gospel and is seldom found in Matthew. What Jesus feels is compassion not just pity. In pity we feel sorry for the person; in compassion, we enter into the feelings of the other, we empathise with their experience. And in doing so Jesus does the unthinkable – he reaches out to touch the leper. This must have been a healing act in itself. The leper was by definition untouchable.”I do will it.” says Jesus, “Be made clean.” The man is immediately healed.

But that is not the end of the story because the man has still to be reintegrated into the community – this is the second part of the healing process. He is told to go to the priests to make the customary offering of thanksgiving. They will examine him and then pronounce him fit to re-enter society.

He is also told not to say anything to anyone about it. Jesus wanted no sensationalism. But how could the man refrain from telling everybody about his wonderful experience of coming in contact with the whole-making power of Jesus? He becomes an ardent evangeliser, a spreader of good news – something we are all called to be.

What is the outcome of our experience of knowing Jesus? How come we do not have the enthusiasm of this man? It is worth noting that that experience was the result of his first having been the victim of a terrible cross. It is often in our crosses that grace appears.

Once again, Jesus goes out into the desert to avoid the enthusiastic crowds. Jesus was not interested in having “fans”, only genuine followers. He would not be ready until his full identity was recognised. That would only happen as he hung dying on the cross (Mark 15:39)

Before we leave this story, we may ask who are the lepers in our society today? One very obvious group are those who have contracted contagious diseases like HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases which are becoming ever more widespread. Even though these are of little danger to most people who have no physical contact, the victims are often rejected in fear or disgust or embarrassment by family members, friends, employers, colleagues, even medical people.

There are also people like homosexuals. If many of them are not lepers it is simply because they dare not reveal their orientation. They dare not do so because they are most likely to be “leper-ised” by even family and friends. There are other marginal groups – nomadic groups like Romanies, drug addicts, poor single mothers, the homeless, alcoholics. . . Indeed, we have many lepers among us. Let us examine our attitudes today and revise them if necessary.

Week 1 | Friday

Hebrews 4:1-5,11; Mark 2:1-12

We read today of the “rest” which only God can give.

The symbol of “rest” is seen now at a deeper dimension. The promise given to the Israelites is a foreshadowing of that given to Christians and it is “good news”. Because the Promised Land was seen as the place of rest that God provided for his people, it was a share in his own rest, which he enjoyed after he had finished his creative work (Gen 2:2). The author now relates this meaning of God’s rest into Ps 95, which we read yesterday.

The reading begins with the advice that, while the opportunity to avail of God’s “rest” is present, the ‘Hebrews’ should avail of it. The implication is that the Israelites in the desert had failed to use the opportunity when they had it. (See yesterday’s reading.)

So the comparison now is between the Israelites and the Christians. The Israelites, who doubted the word of God, did not enter a place of rest which, for them, was the Promised Land. But God’s promise cannot remain unfulfilled, so it now applies to Christians, invited to enter into a very different Promised Land of unalterable and unending happiness, of which the original Promised Land was only a type.

If we are to enjoy the “rest” that God wishes us to have we must open our hearts to God’s call and God’s message. The “good news” (euangelion, evangelium) has been coming to us just as it has been coming to God’s people for generations. In the past, however, many did not benefit because, as we saw in yesterday’s reading, they had closed their ears to the message.

However, those who really put their trust in the message - in both their hearts and in their way of life - will enter that “rest”. Unlike those others of whom God said “in his anger, ‘They shall not enter my rest’”. The author now extends the limited meaning of “rest” in the Psalm to the “rest” that Genesis speaks of God enjoying at the end of the six days of Creation. And that “rest” has been a reality ever since. And we need to remember that it is God’s “rest” we are speaking about and not ours.

It is for the ‘Hebrews’ then, while they have the opportunity, “to enter that rest” and not find it closed off because of their refusal to believe - that is, to believe fully in Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour.

Our goal in life, too, is to experience that “eternal place of rest” face to face with our loving God. And the warning in this reading is totally appropriate for us too. If we want to experience that future “rest”, we need to be always united with our God in the Now. He is to be found nowhere else.

There may be some kind of message here, too, for the way we spend our days and times of rest, especially our Sundays. Are they really days of “rest”? Do we spend the time in ways that are creative and nurturing for both spirit and body?

GOSPEL (Mark 2:1-12)

After some days Jesus returns to Capernaum from his refuge in the desert. Immediately the crowds gather in and around the house where he is staying. It is so crowded that there is no room to get in or out. The ‘house’ is not identified and it is not important. In the early Christian communities, they gathered in one house to celebrate the Eucharist. Jesus was there among them. Some people are inside the house with Jesus, others are still on the outside.

Then, four men arrived carrying a paralytic friend. They were anxious to get to Jesus. Seeing no way in, they went up by the outside staircase on to the flat roof, removed a few tiles and let the man down right at the feet of Jesus.

Jesus is touched by their faith, trust and confidence in him. It is one of the essential conditions for healing. Jesus says to the paralysed man, “Child, your sins are forgiven.” This must have come as a surprising statement to the paralytic. He had come for healing, not forgiveness. Some scribes who were also present where not only surprised they were deeply shocked.”Why does this man [note the level of contempt] speak that way? Only God can forgive sins.” They are perfectly right but their eyes are closed to drawing the obvious conclusion. They don’t see because they do not want to see, because – even worse – they think they can see. (We meet Christians like that too, who are convinced they and they alone are in sole possession of the ‘truth’.)

Jesus then challenges them.”Which is easier to say: ‘Your sins are forgiven’ or ‘Get up, pick up your bed and walk’.” Then he tells the sick man, “Rise, pick up your mat and go home.” Of course, telling a person their sins are forgiven is certainly easier but does the fact that Jesus could heal the paralytic instantly, also mean that his sins were forgiven?

We need to realise the close links the Jews of the time made between sin and sickness. Many kinds of sickness were seen as punishment for personal sin or even the sins of parents. (See the story of the man born blind in John’s gospel, chap. 9.) This man then was understood to be paralysed because of some sin in his life. If Jesus could clearly remove the illness, then the cause of the illness was also being taken away. In so doing, Jesus makes it clear that in forgiving the man’s sin he was not blaspheming. He was what he claimed to be.

In these times, we are beginning to realise that there can be a link between our sicknesses and the way we act and relate with people. We know that there is a mutual influence between our thinking and our attitudes, feelings and behaviour. Many sicknesses are known to be psychosomatic, the result of stress or an imbalance in our relationships with others, our work, our environment. The words holiness, wholeness, health and healing all have a common root. The whole person, one in whom all parts are in perfect harmony, is the truly holy person.

That wholeness is something we need to pray and work for. The paralysed man represents all those who are paralysed in other ways, who are not able to behave with the freedom that a well-integrated person has. And that integration and wholeness concerns our relations with others, with ourselves, with our environment and, of course, with God.

Week 1 | Saturday

Hebrews 4:12-16; Mark 2:13-17

We read today two much-quoted passages from Hebrews and the reading is in two distinct parts. The first is about the power of Scripture and the second speaks of Jesus as our High Priest.

First, we are told of the power of God’s word. It is a word that has been mediated all down the long line of prophets and other spokespersons in the Old Testament and culminating in the Word that has come to us in and through Jesus Christ, who in his whole being and life was the Word. It also comes to us in the earliest writings of the Church which we call the New Testament. And it continues to come to us in many various ways.

This word is able to penetrate into the deepest recesses of our thoughts and feelings, “sharper than any two-edged sword”. It is “living and active”. It is not a dead word on a printed page. By it our most inmost thoughts and intentions are evaluated and judged as we make our quest for that eternal “rest” in God’s bosom.

What a pity so many of our Catholics (as opposed to Christians of other denominations) are often almost total strangers to this Word and rarely experience its power. By and large in our liturgy and catechesis we have done very little to help our people become familiar with this indispensable tool for their life with God, with each other and with the world in which they live.

In the second part of the reading Jesus is introduced as our “Great High Priest”. The author here alone calls Jesus by this title, which is a designation used by Philo for the Logos (the Word). It is the beginning of an extended discussion of the superior priesthood of Christ over and against the priesthood of the Old Testament.

Our High Priest has “passed through the heavens”. In the Old Testament, the high priest on the Day of Atonement would pass from the sight of the people into the Holy of Holies. He was the only person who had the right to enter this sacred space and then only once a year. Now, in a similar but much greater way, Jesus - his work of Atonement accomplished - has passed from the sight of his disciples and ascended through the various levels of the heavens into the sanctuary of Heaven, the place where God himself dwells.

This is the first mention of “heaven” or “heavens” (the Greek is plural) where, according to the Letter, Christ exercises his priestly functions in the presence of his Father. Sitting at the Father’s right hand, the closest place of honour, he belongs there no less than God himself. His single sacrifice, done once and for all, has a perfect and eternal value, never needing to be repeated. Here we find the fulfilment of our greatest hope in God.

The high priest of the Old Testament was a privileged and remote figure (as are many senior hierarchy of our own day). But in Jesus we have a High Priest who is fully able to sympathise with all our weaknesses for he has undergone trials and temptations similar to, and even exceeding, ours. How many of us have suffered as Jesus did?

But, in one respect, he is radically different - he is totally without the slightest taint of sin. We see how Jesus dealt with temptation to sin in the paradigm of the temptations in the desert, a story encapsulating all the events by which he might have been tempted to violate the will of his Father (cf. Matt 4:1-11). We are reminded that Jesus our High Priest is not some remote, lofty personage but someone who has shared intensely the experience of human living, including the weaknesses and temptations to which we are all subjected, though without sin. It is important to realise that weakness and temptation are not to be confused with sin.

Given that we have such a High Priest, we are encouraged to approach God’s throne “with boldness”. There we will find the compassion we need for our failures and the sources of strength in our times of trial.

In our Eucharist we continue to meet our High Priest and indeed the celebrant who presides over the Eucharist is said to be, in a very real way, in loco Christi (in the place of Christ). By our breaking together of the Eucharistic bread we express our deepest desire to be united with the self-giving sacrifice of our High Priest, a union that is manifested in the way we live out the Gospel message in our daily lives.

GOSPEL (Mark 2:13-17)

Jesus certainly chose some very strange people to be his followers. Levi was a tax collector, one of a much despised group of people. The Romans did not collect taxes themselves from their subject people. Local people paid a lump sum to the Romans and they had the right to recoup their deposit in taxes. Of course, they had to make a profit and this laid the system open to widespread abuse and corruption. They were regarded as both traitors to their own people in collecting taxes for Rome, the hated colonial power. They and their families were social outcasts. No self-respecting and observant Jew would have anything to do with such people.

Yet, here is Jesus offering one such person an invitation, “Follow me.” We need to know that Jesus never goes by stereotypes. Nor does he judge people by their past behaviour. He is only interested in what they can be now and in the future. There and then, Levi drops everything and goes after Jesus. That is what following Jesus means. It is what Peter and Andrew, James and John had also done.

Later, when Jesus is dining at “his” house, several known sinners and tax collectors are at table with Jesus and his disciples. The ‘his’ is (deliberately?) ambiguous. Is it the house of Levi or the house of Jesus? In either case, it is very meaningful. Jesus eats in a sinner’s house or he invites a sinner to eat in his house. Perhaps they are celebrating Levi’s becoming a follower. And who else could Levi have invited if not the only people who would mix with him – other tax collectors and outcasts? But, in addition the Gospel comments that, “There were many of them [tax collectors and their like] among Jesus’ followers”.

This is was a real source of scandal for the scribes and Pharisees. If Jesus really was a Rabbi he would have had nothing to do with such people. To sit down and eat with such “unclean” people was to be contaminated oneself. Jesus replies: “It is not the healthy who need a doctor but the sick. I did not come to call the virtuous but sinners.”

As we have already seen, Jesus’ whole mission is one of salvation and redemption of restoring people to wholeness. And how is he to help sinners change, unless he is in direct contact with them? By being with sinners, Jesus is not approving or condoning or turning a blind eye to their behaviour. He describes them as “sick”; they are in need of healing and rehabilitation. This can only be done by reaching out to them.

Of course, one can ask if those judging Jesus were not also sick and in need of healing themselves. The difference was that the ‘sinners’ approached Jesus; while the Pharisees could not see or acknowledge their particular kind of sin and consequent need of healing.

Perhaps our Church should look more closely at this passage. So much of our Church work involves “servicing” the already converted or the semi-converted. We are often not present where people are most in need of hearing the Gospel message. We tend to side with the Pharisees and feel we should keep away from the ‘sinful’ and the ‘immoral’.

We also need to learn the ways by which the Gospel message and the Gospel vision can most effectively be communicated to those who have lost touch with God and the meaning of life.

Week 2 | Monday

Hebrews 5:1-10; Matthew 2:18-22

A lovely reading on how Jesus fulfils the role of our High Priest. In it we come to realise that the true humanity of Jesus makes him a more rather than a less effective high priest to the Christian community. This was something with which the ‘Hebrews’ for whom the Letter was written were having difficulty.

Every high priest is a bridge builder between God and his people.”Every high priest is chosen from among his fellow mortals and put in charge of things pertaining to God on their behalf, to offer gifts and sacrifices for sin.” The writer is thinking mainly of role of the high priest on the Day of Atonement. This ritual was celebrated annually to atone for “all the sins of the Israelites” (Lev 16:34). It was on this occasion, too, that the “scapegoat” was sent out into the wilderness carrying with it all the sins of the people for the past year.

The priesthood, which is connected more with Aaron than Moses, will be treated more fully later in the Letter. In saying that no priest takes the role upon himself, the author may be referring to the fact that in Jesus’ time the office of the high priest was in the hands of a family that had bought control into it.

The priest “is able to deal gently with the ignorant and wayward, since he himself is subject to weakness.” “Deal gently” is a translation of the Greek word metriopathein. This is the only time it appears in the Bible and it was a term used by the Stoics to express a perfect balance between too much and too little feeling. Here it corresponds more to our word “empathy”, the ability to enter into the feelings of others.

The priest, as a human being, is familiar with the sins and weaknesses of others because he experiences them in himself. And he has to include his own sinfulness in the offerings. The priest is no ‘super-man’. And he is a priest not because of his superiority over others but simply because he has been chosen among many to fulfil his intercessory role. This is something over the years which we have tended to ignore, with disastrous consequences in more recent times. As the reading says, it is precisely his sharing in the weaknesses of his fellow human beings which qualifies someone for the role of priest.

That is why the Levitical priest “must offer sacrifice for his own sins as well as for those of the people.” And in our Eucharist too, the celebrant joins with everyone else in confessing his sinfulness during the Introductory Rite.

Being a priest is not an honour that one can confer on oneself; it is truly a calling from God. One “takes it only when called by God, just as Aaron was”. Even Christ did not take the honour to himself; it was conferred on him by his Father. And Psalm 2 is quoted in support of this:

You are my Son,
today I have begotten you.

and again, Psalm 110:

You are a priest forever
according to the order of Melchizedek.

The author of Hebrews is the only New Testament writer to quote this verse of Ps 110 to show that Jesus has been called by God to his role as priest. The implication here may be also that Christ is a priest in the order of Melchizedek and in that of Aaron, the source of the levitical priesthood.

The reading now expresses in a most eloquent way how Jesus, our High Priest, really shared in the pain and sufferings of his brothers and sisters. It shows Jesus’ ability to sympathise with sinners, because of his own experience of the trials and the weakness of human nature, especially the fear of death. In his present exalted state, weakness is now foreign to him, but he understands what we suffer because of his previous earthly experience.

Some people tend to think that Jesus, as the Son of God and his divine nature, did not suffer greatly in his passion. On the contrary, the scene in the garden, when he sweat blood, indicates the degree of terror that he had with the prospect of what was coming. He begged, through prayers and silent tears, to be spared the pain of a terrible death by crucifixion. And yet, he offered himself so utterly to his Father, he submitted himself so completely that his prayer was heard.

But this did not mean that he was spared from suffering and death. On the contrary, he learnt through his suffering the real meaning of total listening and submission to and union with his father.”Although he was Son, he learned obedience through what he suffered.” Jesus was not saved from dying because that was the ultimate purpose of his coming among us but he will later be rescued from death.

And so, in a complete meeting of wills with his Father, he “was made perfect”. He becomes for all those, who unite themselves completely with him, the source of salvation and of wholeness. He becomes our Priest forever, a “high priest according to the order of Melchizedek”. He does that by his total submission to the will of his Father and he points the way for us to follow.

This passage is so full of meaning for all of us. Pain and suffering of some kind will be part of everyone’s life. Like Jesus, we will often pray that that pain be taken away but sometimes we learn that it is precisely in the pain that God is to be found. He is there not to take the pain away, nor to help us get round it but to go through it. It is a paradox of life and one which we need to reflect on, namely, that a life entirely devoid of the challenge of pain is somehow an incomplete life. It is in dealing with our own pain and the pain of others that we grow in strength and maturity - and in love and compassion. And, strange to say, it is there too that we can find deep happiness.

And, when we are deeply puzzled by events like September 11 in New York or the tsunami in Southeast Asia and ask why so many innocent people suffer, we need to gaze at a crucifix and ask the same question: “Why did God not spare his own Son?”

Mark 2:18-22

The disciples of John the Baptist and the Pharisees fasted. It was a sign of a deeper commitment to the service of God. How come then that the disciples of Jesus were not fasting? In their defence, Jesus speaks a kind of parable. A wedding feast is no time for the attendants on the bridegroom to be fasting. It is a time for joy and celebration. Jesus is clearly the bridegroom and his disciples the attendants. A time will come when the bridegroom will no longer be visibly with them, then there will be times when fasting will be appropriate.

Jesus continues with another image. No one uses a piece of new, strong cloth to patch an old garment. At the first sign of stress, the new patch will pull and tear the weaker, old cloth. Similarly, no one puts new, fermenting wine in old, used wineskins. When the wine ferments and expands the old skins have no more stretch and will burst. The skins are ruined and the wine lost.

In both images Jesus is saying that he and his teaching and the Way he is proposing cannot be judged by the old, traditional standards. Jesus has brought about a radical shift in the ways we are to relate to God and to each other. The traditional ways identified with the Pharisees and with John the Baptist was basically one where loyalty to God was expressed through strict observation of laws and external practices of commitment like fasting. The Way of Jesus is quite different. It is primarily interior rather than just exterior. It is ultimately rooted in relationships based on love, a love that always seeks the well-being of the other. If we judge what Jesus does by the old ways, we will have difficulties. We need, as Paul says, “to have the mind of Christ”.

This is still relevant in our Church today. There are many who still are living their Catholic life with the Pharisee mind-set. Several decades after the Second Vatican Council, there are still people who have not understood the radical shift in thinking which it introduced. In the liturgy, for instance, the changes in many places are often just cosmetic, on the surface. There are people still “go to Mass” (note the expression) with basically unchanged attitudes or understanding. Others try to cling to the “old days” - Tridentine Masses, continuing to eat fish on Friday, following old devotions (some of which border on the superstitious).

There is still a good deal of individualism and “saving my soul”, staying in “the state of grace to get to heaven” mentality. There are people who still see sin as primarily the breaking of laws and rules rather than a breakdown in loving relationships with God, with others, with self. It is possible to be perfectly ‘orthodox’, affirming the doctrinal teaching of the Church to the last detail and yet be devoid of love in the way one’s life is lived and showing very little concern for the needy of this world. Sad to say, Pharisaism is alive and well. But it is like trying to force the new thinking of the Vatican Council into the old wineskins of past behaviour.

The new wine of Jesus’ teaching needs to be contained in new wineskins. And part of the problems of the Church in certain parts of the world where Christians are falling away can be traced to our unwillingness to let go of old wineskins.

Week 2 | Tuesday

Hebrews 6:10-20; Mark 2:23-28

The source of all our security is in the oath God has made to all humankind and whose pledge is in Jesus our High Priest who has gone before us and on our behalf.

The reading begins with words of encouragement to the ‘Hebrews’, who are having problems in remaining faithful to their Christian commitment. On the one hand, they are to realise that God is not unmindful of all the good things they have done and the love they have shown in their service of their fellow-Christians. This may include material help given to another church, perhaps the church in Jerusalem which was often in need.

At the same time, he urges them to maintain their former “earnestness”. Let them not become sluggish and half-hearted but follow in the footsteps of those who have maintained their fidelity and shown patience in times of difficulty. Paul, in his letters, often encourages people to be “imitators”, to model themselves on outstanding Christians. He even suggests that they be imitators of himself.

The author then goes on to use the example of Abraham as one who believed in God’s promise to him and was not disappointed. God had sworn in his own name (for there was no other by whom he could swear an oath) that Abraham would be blessed and that his descendants would be great in number. They would be as numerous as grains of sand on the seashore and as stars in the heavens.

This promise seemed impossible of fulfilment when Abraham was asked to sacrifice his only legitimate son, Isaac. Only when, in a great act of trust in God, he proceeded to prepare his son for sacrifice did God stay his hand. Abraham’s total submission in faith to God had been convincingly demonstrated. Later in the Letter, there is a much longer discussion of faith.

When human beings swear by an oath, they do so by someone greater than themselves and, in normal circumstances, an oath solemnly made is taken as a final guarantee. When God wanted to show that his promise to the heirs of Abraham was genuine, he too guaranteed it with an oath.

So the ‘Hebrews’ are protected by these two unassailable guarantees - God’s promise and his confirming oath. With such a backing, their hope in their future with God is made sure and firm. And it is made more sure by the backing of our High Priest, a backing which reaches right to God’s presence. This is all expressed in a Temple image: “We have an anchor. . . reaching right through beyond the veil where Jesus has entered before us and on our behalf, to become a high priest of the order of Melchizedek and for ever.” Actually, the anchor as a symbol of hope is not normally found in Scripture but was common in the culture of Greece and Rome as a symbol of stability. It became a symbol of hope in Christian iconography of the 2nd century AD.

The image is of the Jerusalem Temple where the high priest once a year on the solemn Day of Atonement penetrated beyond the veil or curtain of the Holy of Holies, where God was believed to be present and offered sacrifice on behalf of the people. Jesus, our High Priest and “forerunner on our behalf”, penetrates the veil of Heaven, where God dwells in inaccessible glory. There he intercedes on our behalf. The imagery here anticipates a much longer discussion of the tabernacle later in the Letter.

In our time, Jesus is still our High Priest. In every Eucharist we celebrate and remember with thanksgiving the supreme offering he made of himself on our behalf. And we, too, are full of faith and hope that the promises made in the Gospel will become a reality in our own lives - provided we open ourselves fully to them.

Mark 2:23-28

Today we have a third confrontation between Jesus and the Pharisees on the place of the Law in people’s lives. His disciples are accused of violating the Sabbath by picking ears of corn as they walked through a cornfield. Stealing was not involved as such “gleaning”, especially by the hungry poor, was tolerated. But the Law forbade reaping on the Sabbath. One could hardly call what the disciples were doing as ‘reaping’ but with the casuistic mind of the Pharisees and teachers of the Law the bias was on the side of safety. The perfect observer of the Law would not do anything that could even be regarded in the slightest as a violation.

Jesus solves the issue by appealing to the Hebrew Testament, which, of course, the Pharisees recognised as the word of God. He reminded them how King David and his followers, because they were hungry, went into the house of God and took the loaves of offering, even though only the priests were allowed to eat them. Jesus then enunciates the principle that “the Sabbath was made for people and not people for the Sabbath” and secondly that Jesus is master of the Sabbath.

The first principle is a very important one, namely, that all laws are for people and not vice versa. They are not ends in themselves and moral perfection is not in their literal observance. The hunger of David and his men transcended a religious regulation(that only the priests could eat the bread of offering). For the Jews of Jesus’ time, virtue was in perfect observance of the Law. For Jesus, observance of the Law was only perfect when it was for the good of others and oneself.

The second principle was that Jesus, as the Son of God, was not bound by human laws, however lofty their motive. We would do well to remember those principles in the living out of our Christian faith. It is possible to lead rule-centred Christian lives rather than love- and people-centred.

There is only one law in our faith: Love one another as I have loved you. Even God will not violate that law because God IS love. Any law which, in a particular situation, does not serve this primary law can be set aside and should be set aside. Positive laws are necessary for smooth functioning in society but they are never absolute.

Week 2 | Wednesday

Hebrews 7:1-3,15-17; Mark 3:1-6

We now continue to reflect on the meaning of Jesus Christ as our priest. Today’s reading speaks of Jesus being “in the order of Melchizedek” and discusses both the similarities and differences between the Old Testament figure and Christ.

The author explores the significance of applying Ps 110 (“You are a priest forever, according to the order of Melchizedek”) to Christ. He relies on the only reference to Melchizedek, a mysterious king-priest in the Old Testament, where he is described as meeting with Abraham (Gen 14). The author presumes that he belonged to the beliefs of Israel and not to some other religious grouping.

As the reading affirms, he is the King of Salem and a priest of the Most High God. He encountered Abraham, who was returning from a battle, and blessed him. In return, Abraham gave him “one-tenth of everything”, suggesting that Melchizedek was superior to him. While so doing, we are told that Melchizedek “brought out bread and wine”, and perhaps it is this that, in the mind of the author, partly links Christ’s priesthood and that of Melchizedek, with overtones of the Eucharist.

We are told that “Melchizedek” means “king of righteousness” and “Salem” means “peace”. ‘Salem’ is part of the name of Jerusalem. The messianic blessings of righteousness and peace are foreshadowed in these two names. (In modern Arabic the word for ‘peace’ is ‘salaam’ and in the Malay languages is ‘selamat’.)

The more obvious link of Melchizedek with Christ is that Melchizedek has no father, mother or ancestry, his life no recorded beginning or ending - something rather unusual for a personage in the Old Testament. In this he is seen as similar to the Son of God, one who “remains a priest forever”. The rabbis maintained that anything not mentioned in the Torah does not exist. Consequently, since the OT nowhere mentions Melchizedek’s ancestry, birth, or death, the conclusion can be drawn that he ‘remains. . . forever’.

This, says the Letter, is even more obvious when “another priest” appears, resembling Melchizedek in many ways. Like Melchizedek, Christ has become our priest not through the legal requirement of belonging to a particular priestly family (as in the case of the Levitical priesthood). Jesus actually belonged to the non-priestly tribe of Judah.

Christ became priest “through the power of an indestructible life”, brought about by his resurrection. It is his being “raised up” that makes him our priest rather than his divine nature.

The reading concludes with a repetition of Psalm 110: “You are a priest forever, according to the order of Melchizedek.” Jesus, then, is our High Priest but on a totally different level from the priests of the Jerusalem Temple. Again, the writer is emphasising to his Jewish readers the very different status of Jesus compared to the old order to which they are tempted to return.

Sometimes in our Church, we find people who hanker for the past and fail to understand the necessary changes which an incarnated Church needs to make if it is to be able to communicate effectively with a rapidly changing world.

On a final note, we might remember that Melchizedek is mentioned, together with Abel and Abraham, in the First Eucharistic Prayer.

Mark 3:1-6

Once again we see Jesus in confrontation with the religious leaders. It follows the same pattern as before between him and his critics, here simply referred to as “they”. It is quite clear who “they” are.

The scene is in the local synagogue. Once again “they” were looking for evidence with which to convict Jesus. They were watching to see if Jesus would cure a man with a withered hand on a Sabbath day. There is every likelihood that the man was “planted” in what the Americans call a “set up”. To use a sick person in this way was really despicable.

There is no doubt that Jesus is fully aware of what is happening. Unhesitatingly, he tells the man to come out and stand in the middle of the assembly. Then he puts his question: “Is it against the law on the Sabbath to do good, or to do evil? to save life, or to kill?”

His opponents are reduced to silence. They have neither the honesty nor the integrity to give the obvious answer to the question.

In another example of how Jesus shows his feelings, we are told that he was both grieved and angry at their stubborn attitude. Grieved because their attitude was so inappropriate for people who believed they were close to God. Angry because of the terrible injustice they were prepared to impose on this man. In their book, no suffering justified breaking the Law. But for Jesus it is not a matter of keeping or breaking laws but of doing good.

He tells the man to stretch out his withered arm and it is completely cured. The Pharisees – humiliated – immediately went out and began to plot with the Herodians to get rid of Jesus. The Pharisees needed the help of the Herodians, who were supporters of Herod Antipas, the tetrarch of Galilee and Perea, if they were to take action against Jesus. This strange alliance shows the extent of the Pharisees’ anger and blinding hatred. The Herodians represented everything the Pharisees despised. It would be like an alliance between Margaret Thatcher and Fidel Castro!

The story once again highlights the difference between morality and law. It was against the Law to do healing work on the Sabbath (and even in our society doctors do not normally work on Sundays). This was because, in normal circumstances, the attention of a doctor might involve extensive treatment. But here the healing is done in a moment. Can it be called work? Can it be seen as a violation of the spirit of the Sabbath?

In this particular case, where the situation was chronic and causing no immediate distress to the man, it is worth noting that the healing could easily have taken place on another day. But Jesus uttered a principle that transcends all positive law: It is always justified to go what is good, provided no greater good is denied. Similarly, no truly loving act can ever be sinful even though it may violate a law. All laws, except for the law of love, are relative.

The Law about healing on the Sabbath had good intentions and was part of the observance of the Lord’s day but it was being absolutised by the Pharisees. It is a tendency in our Christian life which we must also avoid. Even the law about being at Mass on Sunday can be absolutised. Sometimes there are pressing needs e. g. the care of a sick person or a child which can override the law about Sunday Mass.

Christianity is about loving relationships not about conformity to laws.”If I have not love, I am nothing” says St Paul.

Week 2 | Thursday

Hebrews 7:25-8:6; Mark 3:7-12

The reading shows again the contrast between the high priests of the law and Christ our High Priest. The ‘Hebrews’ (to whom the Letter is addressed) are being reminded once again that the Jesus Christ they are threatening to abandon in favour of the old Temple-based worship is on a far superior level.

In the two verses immediately preceding today’s reading the author reminds his readers that the former priests were many in number because they died off and had to be replaced. Christ, however, holds his priesthood permanently because he endures forever. Hence (and here our reading begins) he is able for all time to be a source of salvation for us because his intercession on our behalf is never-ending.

And it is totally appropriate that we should have such a High Priest, “holy, blameless, undefiled, separated from sinners [in their sinfulness] and exalted above the heavens”. In this, Christ is totally different from the Levitical priests. Perhaps it also indicates Jesus’ superiority over Melchizedek. Christ does not need to offer sacrifices every day for the sins of the people and for his own sins. (In fact, daily sacrifice is nowhere mentioned in the Mosaic Law. The high priest was only expected to offer sacrifice on the Day of Atonement “for his own sins and for those of the people”, Lev 16:11-19).

Jesus made one sacrifice for the whole world and for all time, a sacrifice that does not need to be repeated. The Levitical priests offered animals but our High Priest makes the unique offering of his totally sin-less self, a single offering that need never be repeated.

The Jewish law appointed as high priests men, who like everyone else, were subject to human frailty. But “the word of the oath” which came later than and replaced the old law appoints as High Priest “a Son who had been made perfect forever”. The fulfilment of God’s oath regarding the priesthood of Melchizedek (“You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek”, Ps 110:4) makes the Son of God the perfect priest forever.

As we enter chapter 8, the superiority of Christ as High Priest is further emphasised.

The argument so far has been to prove that what Christ is, i. e. , an eternal and perfect priest, is superior to what the Levitical priests are, since they are mortals and sinners. Now the argument goes on to show that what Christ does is equally superior to what the Levitical priests do: Christ’s sanctuary is better because it is in heaven, while the one on earth is only a copy of it, and the covenant brought by the mediation of Christ is a better covenant. (New Jerusalem Bible, loc. cit)

Our High Priest is not in a temple made by human hands. Rather he sits “at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens”. He serves “in the sanctuary and the true tent” that God and not any mortal human has set up or could set up. (Before the building of the Temple by Solomon, the Ark of the Covenant, representing the presence of Yahweh among his people, was housed in a special tent or tabernacle.) God dwells in an altogether superior “Holy of Holies” and it is there that Christ has access to his Father on an equal and permanent level.

“True” here means “real” in contradistinction to a mere “copy and shadow”, as the earthly sanctuary is described below. The idea that the earthly sanctuary is a shadowy reflection of a heavenly model may be derived from the Platonic concept of a real world of which our observable world is merely a shadow. (Plato’s famous cave!)

Further, the role of every priest is to offer gifts and sacrifices and our Priest also has something to offer. But if he were on earth, he would not be a priest in the ordinary human sense, because the priests only made offerings in accordance with the Law, that is, for the sins of the people and their own sins. Christ’s offering, on the other hand, is made purely on our behalf. He does not need to make sacrifice for himself; on the contrary, he is the Perfect Offering which is pleasing to the Father.

In addition, the priests make their offering in a sanctuary that is only a pale shadow of the heavenly sanctuary where God dwells. For, when Moses was about to erect the tent or tabernacle (in which the Ark of the Covenant was placed), he was told by Yahweh to make it exactly according to the instructions he was given on Mount Sinai. As such, it had all the limitations of human workmanship. (The use of the present tense here leads some to believe that the Temple was still standing and functioning and that these words must have been written prior to 70 AD when Jerusalem was sacked and destroyed by the emperor Titus, an event commemorated in the Arch of Titus still to be seen in the Roman Forum.)

But Christ as Priest has been given a much higher form of ministry and is the mediator between God and us of a new and better covenant, which is being carried out according to better promises.

All in all, then, how can the ‘Hebrews’ be thinking of going back to the old dispensation when the new one with Jesus Christ is on a totally different level and can do so much more for them?

It is for us to remember that we, too, are sharers in this new dispensation. Let us thank Christ for the gift of the Church, for his Living Word and for the many ways in which our lives are nourished by our adherence to our High Priest.

Mark 3:7-12

This is a summary text indicating the tremendous drawing power of Jesus with the ordinary people. It is in stark contrast with the preceding passages of conflict with the religious leaders who were out to destroy him. People were coming not only from Galilee, where Jesus was living and working, but from Jerusalem and Judea in the south, from across the river Jordan and even from Gentile regions like Tyre and Sidon. They came because of all they had heard about what he was doing.

So great were the crowds that Jesus had to ask his disciples to get a boat so that he would not be crushed. Huge numbers of people, who had heard of his healing powers, wanted to touch him. They felt that was enough to be healed. Some, possessed by evil spirits, fell down before him and called out, “You are the Son of God!” Jesus warned them to keep silent. As mentioned before, this call was not a confession of faith but an attempt to turn aside the threatening power of Jesus by using the exact name of the opposing ‘spirit’.

Jesus knew that the people were not ready for this revelation of his identity. Their attitudes were still largely superficial. They were coming for their own immediate needs and not as true followers. They came to get, not to give or share.

Nevertheless, Jesus would not turn them away. He knew that they had great needs which only he could satisfy. He was full of compassion for them and anxious to bring healing into their lives.

Week 2 | Friday

Hebrews 8:6-13; Mark 3:13-19

Jesus, with a far higher ministry, is the mediator of a new and better covenant between God and his people. A large part of today’s reading is taken up with a passage from the prophet Jeremiah, as confirmation of the writer’s argument about the superiority of the new covenant made through Jesus Christ.

The reading opens by stating that Jesus has obtained a better ministry than that of the Levitical priesthood and is the mediator of a better covenant, that is, the covenant that was sealed between God and us by the sacrificial death of Jesus.

Christ is the only perfect mediator because he is truly human and truly divine. He is the only and only true intermediary between God and the human race. He unites and reconciles them. Through him comes God’s love and complete revelation. And, in heaven, he continues to intercede for those who remain faithful to him.

The author further adds that, if the first covenant had been without fault or defect, it would not need to have been replaced. But God did find fault with it and that is confirmed by the long quotation from the prophet Jeremiah which immediately follows. It comes from Jeremiah 31:31-34. The author follows the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament. Some discrepancies with the official text may be because the author was working from a different version or because he deliberately altered the text himself.

In summary, the pre-eminence of the new covenant lies in its superior benefits:

1. God’s laws will become inner principles which will enable his people to delight in doing his will;

2. God and his people will have an intimate fellowship;

3. Sinful ignorance of God will be removed forever;

4. Forgiveness of sin will be an everlasting reality. (NIV Study Bible)

The quotation opens by Jeremiah quoting Yahweh’s words in which he says that he is going to establish a new covenant with the houses of Israel (the Northern Kingdom) and Judah (the Southern Kingdom). This new covenant will be different from the one that was made through Moses on Mount Sinai, “when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt”.

There is need now for a new covenant because the people did not observe the first one and so they became distanced from the Lord. A reading of the books of Samuel and Kings affords abundant evidence of the people’s infidelity to Yahweh and the Law.

This new covenant will be a covenant in the heart and not just in outward behaviour, such as the observance of external rules and rituals.”I will put my laws in their minds, and write them on their hearts”. And then comes the covenant promise: “I will be their God and they shall be my people.” It is an agreement that needs to be kept by both sides.

From then on, there will be no need for people to teach each other, saying “Know the Lord.” Because, by their observance of the covenant and the mutual relationship it implies, they will already know their Lord in the way that really matters - finding and serving him in every area of their lives.

Furthermore, God will show compassion for their past sins and even forget them entirely. This idea is central to the new covenant. As we know from Jesus in the Gospel, God only sees us as we are at the present moment. Where our past is concerned he has a very bad memory!

Now, the Hebrews author resumes his message. In speaking of a “new covenant”, it is clear that the old one is now obsolete.”And what is obsolete and growing old will soon disappear.” Again, the argument is clear: what are the ‘Hebrews’ thinking of by wanting go back to a way of life that has lost its validity for them?

We, too, need to remain faithful and vigilant in our commitment to the Jesus as our link with God our loving Father. For us, too, it is what goes on in our heart that matters more than what we just do on the outside.

Mark 3:13-19

Jesus goes up a mountain. It has no name because it is the symbolism that is more important than the location. Mountains in the Scriptures are holy places associated with the presence of God. Jesus goes up mountains at more solemn moments in his public life: here, during the Sermon on the Mount, at the Transfiguration, and after feeding the 5,000…

Jesus’ purpose on this occasion is to pick the inner circle of his followers.”They were those whom he wanted.” Later he will say: “I have chosen you; you have not chosen me.” And “they came to him”. A call includes both the invitation and the response. The same is true for each one of us. The call is always there; can we say the same about our response?

There were twelve in this inner circle of disciples. In the New Covenant they would be the “patriarchs”, the foundational pillars of the new community, embracing the new Israel.

They are called “apostles”. A word to be clearly distinguished from “disciples”. The ‘disciple’, which comes from a Latin word meaning ‘to learn’, is essentially a follower who imbibes the teaching of the teacher and tries to make it part of his life. The ‘apostle’, however, from a Greek word meaning ‘to go out on a mission’ (like an ambassador), is essentially one who has a mandate from the teacher to pass on to others.

In the Pauline letters, where the term appears most often in the Christian Testament, it means primarily who has been a witness of the Risen Lord and has been commissioned to proclaim the resurrection. Paul himself, because of his experience at Damascus, is regarded as an Apostle.

These Twelve were to be Jesus’ companions. They were to preach, that is, proclaim his message of the Kingdom and work with him to make it a reality. They were to cast out demons, to liberate people from all situations which enslaved people to any form of evil.

The list is headed - as are all lists of the Apostles - Simon Peter. For Mark, the name Peter was given on this occasion. In Matthew it is given later, following his confession of Jesus’ identity. Strangely, the list includes included one man who would betray (‘hand over’) his Master and Lord. And today there are still those, called by Jesus, who betray him. What about me? “Is it I, Lord?” “There go I but for the grace of God.”

Week 2 | Saturday

Hebrews 9:2-3,11-14; Mark 3:20-21

The author continues to tell his readers about the incomparable superiority of Jesus as High Priest over the Levitical priesthood. Today, there is a comparison between the tabernacle and sacrifices of the old dispensation and the new tabernacle and new and far more effective sacrifice of Jesus.

The reading begins by giving a brief description of the sanctuary where the once-a-year sacrifice of the old dispensation was made. During their years of wandering in the desert, the Israelites had a special tent serving as God’s sanctuary in their midst. After they settled in the Promised Land, it was David who first thought of putting up a permanent building. How could Yahweh still be housed in a tent when David himself, as king, was living in a palace? However, David was told that the house of his dynasty was more important for out of it would come the Saviour. So it would not be until Solomon’s reign that the first Temple was built.

The tent (and later the Temple in its most sacred inner area) had two sections: an outer area with the seven-branched lampstand which was kept burning through the night and the table with the loaves of presentation. The table was made of acacia wood overlaid with gold and on it were the twelve loaves, arranged in two rows of six, presumably representing the twelve tribes of Israel. This was the Holy Place.

Then, behind a second veil, was the innermost Holy of Holies, accessible only once a year by the High Priest on Yom Kippur, the Feast of Atonement. The veil guarding the Holy of Holies is called the “second” because there was another veil at the entrance to the Holy Place, or the “outer tabernacle” (Exod 26:36).

The Holy of Holies, the inmost sanctuary, contained the golden altar of incense and the Ark of the Covenant. In the Ark, which was overlaid with gold, were a golden urn holding manna (during the time the manna was falling), Aaron’s rod which had miraculously blossomed, and the Tables of the Law. The Ark was shielded by two cherubim. These were two winged figures made of pure gold, of one piece with the atonement cover, or mercy seat, and standing at either end of it. It was between them that the glory of God’s presence appeared. The mercy seat fit exactly over the top of the ark and was a slab of pure gold on which the blood of the sin offering was sprinkled by the high priest on the Day of Atonement.

The regulations for worship under the old covenant permitted all the priests to enter the Holy Place, but only the high priest to enter the Holy of Holies and then only once a year. The description of the sanctuary and its furnishings is taken essentially from Exod 25-26. This exclusion of the people from the Holy of Holies signified that they were not allowed to stand in God’s presence because their offerings and sacrifices, which were merely symbols of their need of spiritual renewal, could not obtain forgiveness of sin. (New American Bible)

When Jesus came, however, he entered a “more perfect”, uncreated tent and entered the “Holy Place”, the inner sanctuary of God himself. In his ascension, Christ “passed through” all the successive heavenly spheres that form the “Holy Place” of the celestial Tent, and finally came into the presence of God in the celestial “Holy of Holies”.

He brought with him not the sacrificial blood of animals (as the high priest would have done) but his own blood, which won for all of us an everlasting redemption. And we all, without exception, have access to this sanctuary.

There is no real comparison between the two. The blood of goats and bulls, the sprinkling of a heifer’s ashes, may sanctify the bodies of those who have become defiled by sin. Ashes from a red heifer which had been burned were mixed with water and used for the cleansing of those who had become ritually defiled by touching a corpse. The blood of sacrificial animals, sprinkled on the faithful, achieves at most the “holiness of their outward lives”.

But just think how the Blood of Christ, who offered himself in total sinlessness through the Spirit to his Father, will purify and liberate our inner being, our very selves. We are now freed from the slavery of “dead works” (external observance of laws and rituals) for the pure worship of the living God.

It is important for us, too, not to fall back on a ritualistic religion and realise that it is only in the Spirit that we approach the Throne of God. And that Spirit is the Spirit of Jesus, our Risen Lord, who showed us the greatest love possible by giving his life for his friends. If we have his Spirit, we will do the same.

Mark 3:20-21

Today we are told that “Jesus came home”? Yet, at another time he will say that he has nowhere to lay his head. One, of course, can say that anywhere can be the home of Jesus or that home is where Jesus is. We have seen references already to the ‘house’ or the ‘home’ indicating any house where Jesus is gathered with his disciples, with those who listen attentively to what he says.

At the same time, so many people came looking for him that he did not even have time to eat. This is in strong contrast with what is going to follow. One might think such popularity would be welcomed especially by his family; a kind of reflected glory. On the contrary, he is an embarrassment to them. They think he is mad. He must be mad because he is in conflict with the religious leaders, with the Pharisees and the Scribes. (It reminds one of the parents of the man born blind who did not want to have anything to do with their son because of his relationships with his healer, Jesus.) He must be mad because a genuine rabbi would never be seen happily in the company of sinners, tax collectors, prostitutes, lepers and outcasts.

Similarly, teachers of the Law who had come all the way from Jerusalem (news of Jesus must now be reaching that far) were saying that he must be possessed by the prince of demons and that it was by the power of the prince of demons that he drove out other demons.

From the experience that Jesus had, any of his followers must not expect, simply because he bases his life on truth and brotherly love, that he will be admired, respected and loved in return. From Jesus down, every true follower of Christ has faced misunderstanding, opposition and even verbal and physical violence. And this sometimes from within his own community.

Week 3 | Monday

Hebrews 9:15,24-28; Mark 3:22-30

We begin our third and last week reading the Letter to the Hebrews. We continue with showing the superiority of Christ’s sacrifice over that of the old covenant. The death of Christ alone is effective in wiping out sins which were committed under the old covenant.

Here we see how Jesus seals the new covenant with his blood. The passage shows that the death of Christ was essential for him to act effectively as mediator. It does this by a play on words: the Greek word diatheke can mean ‘pact’ (covenant) as it does in the opening sentence of today’s reading or ‘last will and testament’, as it does further down in the passage (but not included in our reading). So the author can argue that a ‘pact’ or covenant also suggests the death of a ‘testator’. All pacts at the time were sealed with the shedding of blood. In signing the covenant between Yahweh and the Israelites at Sinai we read in Exodus: “Moses took half of the blood [from the sacrificial animals] and put it in large bowls; the other half he splashed on the altar. . . Then he took the blood and sprinkled it on the people, saying ‘This is the blood of the covenant which the Lord has made with you’.” (The similarity with our words of consecration in the Eucharist is not accidental.) Hence, it is argued that Christ needed to die in founding the New Covenant (or ‘Pact’) between God and the human family.

Jesus is, in fact, the mediator of a new covenant, a new solemn and mutual bonding between God and the world. This covenant brings the promise of an “eternal inheritance” which was promised by Jesus during his public life. This has been brought about by the death of Jesus which saves us from the sins which the old covenant could not remove. It brings about deliverance from sins committed under the old covenant, which the Mosaic sacrifices were incapable of effacing. Until this happened, the “eternal inheritance” promised by God could not be obtained.

As High Priest, Jesus did not enter a sanctuary erected by human hands, like that of the Temple in Jerusalem, which was only a distant copy of the true sanctuary where God dwells. Jesus entered that sanctuary, Heaven itself, standing in the very presence of God on our behalf.

And, in contrast to the Levitical high priest, he did not need to offer himself again and again, like the high priest who, each year, entered the Holy of Holies in the Temple to make the same sacrifice and offering “blood that is not his own”, the blood of some slaughtered animal. If Jesus’ sacrifice had not been once for all, he too would have had to offer himself in sacrifice again and again.

As it is, he offered himself just once for all mankind “at the end of the age” and took away our sin by the sacrifice of himself. Jesus is both Priest and Victim in this unique sacrifice.

In using the term “end of the age” the author is reflecting Jewish Christian eschatology which speaks of the “present age” and the “age to come”. Saying that the sacrifice of Christ is unique because it is being offered “at the end of the last age” is to say that in a way it marks the end of human history and has no need to be repeated.

Jesus’ sacrifice wipes out sin not with “other” blood but with Christ’s own blood. It is once and for all. Jesus’ coming has ushered in the great Messianic era, towards which all history has moved.”He was destined before the foundation of the world, but was revealed at the end of the ages for your sake” (1 Pet 1:20).

And just as it is our destiny to die once and then face our God in judgement, so Christ, having offered himself and given his life just once to bear the “sins of many”, will appear just once more to take with him to the Father all those who await him at his Second coming, also called the parousia.

Then Jesus will appear “a second time”, as the high priest reappeared on the Day of Atonement, emerging from the Holy of Holies, which he had entered “to take away sin”. This scene is described dramatically and poetically in Sirach 50:5-11. It was a high point in the Jewish calendar.

The reference to the taking away of sin is to a passage in Isaiah about the Suffering Servant: “He surrendered himself to death and was counted among the wicked; and he shall take away the sins of many, and win pardon for their offences” (Is 53:12). Since the Greek verb anaphero can mean both “to take away” and “to bear”, the author no doubt intended to play upon both meanings: Jesus took away sin by bearing it himself. See John 1:29 where John the Baptist says to his disciples, “Here is the Lamb of God who takes away/bears the sin of the world.”

The “sins of many” is used in the Semitic meaning of “all” in an inclusive sense, as, for instance, in Mark (14:24): “Jesus said to them, ‘This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many’.” In the Eucharistic Prayer the celebrant says, “This is the cup of my blood. . . it will be shed for you and for all.” The old Latin translation was pro multis, literally meaning “for many”.

Christ has died once and for all for our sins - every sin we have ever committed and those we have yet to commit. But, to experience his forgiveness and be fully reconciled with him, we need constantly to express since repentance and turn back to our Father, as the prodigal did in the parable.

GOSPEL (Mark 3:22-30)

We have seen how the religious leaders have tried various ploys to expose Jesus as a violator of the Law. They now try a new tactic to discredit him. Basically they make two accusations:

a. He is possessed, not by just any ordinary demon, but by Beelzebul the prince of demons.

b. It is through the power of the demon in him that he expels evil spirits from others.

Jesus answers both charges. He responds to the second charge by showing its internal contradictions. If the devil was acting against himself his power would eventually collapse, like a divided household. To drive the demon from someone as Jesus did was to liberate that person, free that person from evil powers. Why would the demon want to do something like that? The charge does not make sense. It could only be made by a perverse mind.

Nor can someone enter a strong man’s house to burgle without first overpowering the strong man inside and rendering him ineffective. Clearly Jesus is the strong man who cannot be overcome.

The next statement of Jesus, however, may cause difficulties for some. Jesus says that every sin, including all kinds of blasphemies that people can utter, can be forgiven but the sin of blaspheming the Holy Spirit. Why only this sin? Is God’s mercy not infinite and omnipotent?

The Spirit is the origin of all that is good in Jesus, in people and in the world. God is present in the world through the Spirit. To blaspheme against the Holy Spirit is to deliberately refuse to see that presence, that goodness, as the scribes, for instance, obstinately refused to see the hand of God’s love in all that Jesus was doing. Something the ordinary people had no difficulty in seeing.

Once we are in a position that we have closed our minds to God’s presence in our lives, how can God reach us? God can only forgive those who reach out to him in sorrow and repentance. Forgiveness only came to the Prodigal Son when he turned back to find his father. Forgiveness for God is reconciliation; it is the healing of our wound. He cannot, he will not reach into a heart that has closed itself tight. He will never force his way in. Love is not love if it is not free. But the corollary of that freedom is the ability to choose the opposite. That was the choice the Scribes were making. Hopefully, it is a choice we will never make. God’s hand is always reaching out to me but I need to stretch out mine in order to take it.

Week 3 | Tuesday

Hebrews 10:1-10; Mark 3:31-35

In a final reflection Hebrews continues by pointing out the inadequacy of the Law to take away people’s sins.

The old dispensation was only a shadow of and a prefiguration for what was to come. It could not, through sacrifices repeated year after year on the Day of Atonement, bring about the lasting reconciliation of God with his people.

Otherwise, if the people really had no consciousness of being any longer in sin, why would they have come year after year to make the sacrificial offering? On the contrary, the repetition of the same sacrifice was only a confirmation of an ongoing sense of guilt for their sinfulness. The simple fact of the matter is that the blood of bulls and goats is quite incapable of taking away sin, of bringing out about a lasting reconciliation with God.

The author then quotes words from Psalm 40:7-9a as a foretelling of what was really needed to bring about this reconciliation. He puts the words of the psalmist on the lips of Christ himself at his incarnation, when he “came into the world”. The author follows the Septuagint (Greek text) which is somewhat different from the original Hebrew but is more suited to his argument.

It is not sacrifices and other offerings that the Father wants. Instead he has provided his Son with a body, a body that will be offered in sacrifice for all of us. The Father takes no pleasure in “sacrifices and offerings and burnt offerings and sin offerings”. These four things, mentioned in Ps 40, are probably indicating the four principal types of Old Testament sacrifices: peace offerings; cereal offerings; burnt offerings or holocausts; and sin offerings (including guilt offerings mentioned in Lev 5:14-26).

Jesus acknowledged that the Old Testament sacrifices did not remit the sins of the people and so, perceiving the will of God, offered his own body for this purpose. Jesus then, through the Psalmist, says, “See, God, I have come to do your will.” The highest form of sacrifice is our total union with the will of God.

The former dispensation is now abolished and the offering of Jesus takes its place in a new dispensation. So now, it is by God’s will carried out by Jesus in his death that we become “sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all”. It was the total surrender of the Son to the Father that effectively and forever interceded for the removal of our sin.

Each one of us has to mirror that surrender in our own lives, making the will of God our own, and then we will experience the total liberation that God wants for us as we become united as one with him.

GOSPEL (Mark 3:31-35)

We know that many of Jesus’ family already thought he was mad and he had become an

embarrassment to them. Now they come to the house where Jesus is teaching and, standing outside, send in a message asking for him. Do they want to talk with him or to remove him from what he is doing?

The message is sent in: “Your mother and brothers and sisters are outside asking for you.” To which Jesus replies, “Who are my mother and my brothers?” And pointing to those sitting at his feet listening to his teaching, he says, “Here are my mother and my brothers.” And he clarifies that further by adding, “Anyone who does the will of God, that person is my brother and sister and mother.”

We should note that Jesus’ family is described twice as being on the “outside”. They are “outsiders”. By implication, those sitting in a circle with Jesus are on the “inside”; they are the “insiders”.

What Jesus is clearly saying is that being on the “inside” is not just a question of location but of relationship. And that relationship is not by blood but by identification with the Way of Jesus. To be a Christian is to enter into a new family, with stronger ties than those of blood and where everyone is seen as a brother or a sister. The “insider” is defined simply as “anyone who does the will of God”. So it can include those who are not Christian at all.

A disturbing question that might arise from this passage is the status of Jesus’ mother, Mary. Was she also on the “outside”? The answer surely is an unequivocal ‘No’. We know from Luke’s gospel that, when invited by the angel to be the mother of Jesus, Mary gave an unconditional ‘Yes’.”Behold, I am the slave girl of the Lord. May it be done to me according to your word.” This was her total surrender to the will of God and it was something that she never withdrew through all the difficulties she experienced and, most of all, when the “sword of sorrow” pierced her heart as she saw her own Son’s heart pierced on the Cross. She was with him to the very end and finally would share his joy in the Resurrection.

On one occasion (Luke 11:27-28), when Mary was praised as blessed and privileged for having a wonderful Son like Jesus, Jesus replied, “No, blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and keep it.” Mary is on the “inside”, not because she was the Mother of Jesus but because of her total identifying with his mission and being with him to the very end.

May we be able to say the same.

Week 3 | Wednesday

Hebrews 10:11-18; Mark 4:1-20

We take up from yesterday’s reading where the author continues to show the superiority of Jesus’ single sacrifice over the many sacrifices of the old dispensation.

In the old order, the priest stood day after day at his service, offering again and again the same sacrifices which were really ineffectual in taking away sin.

Christ, on the other hand, offered for all time just one sacrifice not of the fruits of the earth but of himself as a perfect offering in total union with his Father. Because of this, he now “sits at the right hand of the Father” - his work is complete - and he waits for his enemies “to be made a footstool for his feet”. The “sitting” of Jesus is contrasted with the Levitical priest who always stood, implying his sacrificing role was never finished.

The waiting period is that between the enthronement of Jesus at his resurrection-ascension and his Second Coming. The identity of the “enemies” is not specified. Writing to the Corinthians Paul had said: “He must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For God has put all things in subjection under his feet” (1 Cor 15:25-27).

In his one offering, Christ has made perfect all those “who are sanctified”. This is confirmed by the words of Scripture in a passage which the author adapts from Jeremiah, where Yahweh says that he will make a covenant with his people.”I will put my laws in their hearts, and I will write them on their minds.” And, using another passage from Jeremiah, he adds: “I will remember their sins and lawless deeds no more.”

In a concluding remark, the author says that where there is forgiveness from God, there is no longer any need for further offering for sin.

Again, it is for us to open ourselves totally to the forgiving and healing power of Jesus Christ and to unite ourselves fully with his self-offering. Let us say together with him, “I have come to do your will, O God.”

GOSPEL (Mark 4:1-20)

Today we see Jesus teaching by the seashore. The crowds were so great that Jesus had to use one of his disciples’ boats and preach from there. Generally speaking, Jesus teaches the crowds near the sea but, when teaching his disciples, he tends to go to a mountain or secluded place.

For the first time in Mark, we come across a number of parables spoken by Jesus. Before we go on to discuss the parable in today’s passage, let us make a few remarks about parables in general. In the New Testament the word ‘parable’ represents a wide range of literary forms. In general, however, it can be said that a parable is a way of illustrating a point of Jesus’ teaching through an illustration from daily life. Sometimes there may be an exaggerated element only to make the point of the parable more striking.

Strictly speaking, the difference between a parable and an allegory is that the former just makes one point as a comparison while in the latter each of the items in the story has a symbolism of its own. Generally speaking, Jesus’ parables were of the first kind but allegory cannot always be excluded. We will see that today’s parable of the sower is a parable in the strict sense but when Jesus explains the parable to his disciples it is made to look more like an allegory. It is not a point to argue about.

The parable of the sower, as presented here, is in three parts. The first part seems to be close to what Jesus actually said and, like most parables, just makes one point. That point is that God’s sowing represents his plan to build the Kingdom, to make his reign effective in the world. Although it may seem to meet with partial or total failure in some areas, overall it will certainly succeed. God’s plans will not be frustrated.

It is a parable to induce confidence, especially for a tiny Church in times of difficulty and persecution (which Mark’s church would have been experiencing).

The parable concludes with the call: “Listen, anyone who has ears to hear!” Listening is a very important element in our relationship with God and Jesus. In the Gospel, listening involves:

- actually hearing the message

- understanding the message

- assimilating the message into one’s own thinking

Once we have reached the third stage, the final stage will inevitably follow:

- acting on the message. Once a way of seeing life becomes part of us, then our behaviour will want to act accordingly. We will not have to force ourselves to act. This is the freedom that comes with being one with Christ and his Way.

The next part of the passage may seem strange. It seems to say that Jesus spoke in parables so that those outside his own circle would not be able to understand. That does not really make sense. Was his message not for all? In fact, Jesus is quoting a rather cynical passage from the Hebrew Testament about people who keep looking but never see, keep listening but never hear. Why? Because if they did see and understand, they might be converted and change but they do not want to be converted or to change. They have already made up their minds. We can meet people like that today.

In fact, the parables, using graphic images from familiar scenes in daily life, were spoken precisely to help people understand the message of Jesus. But, as we have seen, there were those who simply did not want to see even the obvious.

Finally, there is another interpretation of the parable in response to a request by the disciples for an explanation. The explanation somewhat changes the emphasis on the parable itself and it becomes more an allegory than a parable. In the original parable the emphasis is really on the Sower, God, and the ultimate success of his work.

Here the emphasis is on the soil in which the seed is trying to grow. It describes different responses to the Word of the God (the seed). We have to realise first that, in Palestine at this time, the sowing took place before the ploughing. Then we need to visualise a rock-strewn field lying fallow since the last harvest. There are public paths going across it. Weeds and brambles have grown up in parts. This is where the farmer will scatter his seed.

Some seed falls on the barren paths. It gets no welcome and never even begins to grow. Birds come and eat it up. This refers to those who come in contact with the message of Jesus but it never even gets a start in their lives.

Some falls on the rocks where in the crevices there may be some moisture. The seed begins to grow but soon runs out of moisture and nourishment, withers and dies. This is compared to those who embrace Christianity with enthusiasm but, once they meet with some opposition or persecution (which would have been common in the early Church), they fall away.

Some falls among the weeds and brambles. The seed does take root but the weeds are growing too and they eventually choke out the wheat. This is a picture of the Christian who gets caught up in the prevailing (materialistic) values of the surrounding society and ends up producing nothing.

Finally, there is seed which falls on fertile soil and yields a good harvest in varying amounts. These are the Christians who really hear the word (see above) and produce much fruit.

Notice that to be a Christian, it is not enough just to be fervent and observant but one also must be productive.”A good tree bears good fruit.” A branch of the vine that does not bear fruit will be cut off.

I may reflect today which of the above categories best describes me.

Week 3 | Thursday

Heb 10:19-25

We pick up today where we left off yesterday but there is a more practical turn to today’s reading. There is a call to persevere in our following of Christ and our living out of the Gospel message.

The passage has been summarised as follows:

Practical consequences from these reflections on the priesthood and sacrifice of Christ should make it clear that Christians may now have direct and confident access to God through the person of Jesus (19-20), who rules God’s house as high priest (21). They should approach God with sincerity and faith, in the knowledge that through baptism their sins have been remitted (22), remind themselves of the hope they expressed in Christ at that event (23). They are to encourage one another to Christian love and activity (24), not refusing, no matter what the reason, to participate in the community’s assembly, especially in view of the parousia (25). (New American Bible)

Once again we are reminded that, through Jesus, we have special access to God. The symbols used are taken from the Temple rituals but applied to Christ.

“We have confidence to enter the sanctuary by the blood of Jesus.” The sanctuary is the very presence of God and not just some man-made structure and we enter by the blood of Jesus and not the blood of animals as in the old dispensation.

We enter by “the new and living way that he opened for us through the curtain (that is, through his flesh)”. Jesus is the Way and, in the Acts of the Apostles, the Christians are called “followers of the Way”. The high priest of old used to enter into the presence of Yahweh by passing through the curtain or veil protecting the Holy of Holies. He alone could enter and then only once a year. All of the baptised, however, can now pass continually into the presence of God through the blood of Jesus, our perfect and only High Priest, which has permanently removed the barrier of sin.

Symbolically, at the moment of Jesus’ death, the veil separating the Holy Place from the Holy of Holies was “torn in two from top to bottom” (Mark 15:38). God’s presence had moved from the sacrifices of the Temple to the sacrifice offered on the Cross. (Another reason for the ‘Hebrews’ not to go back to the old dispensation.)

There now follow five exhortations of a practical nature:

1.”Let us draw near to God.”

2.”Let us hold unswervingly to hope.”

3.”Let us consider how we can encourage each other.”

4.”Let us not give up gathering together.”

5.”Let us encourage one another.”

The author now urges the ‘Hebrews’ (and us) as they enter into the presence of God to be “sincere in heart and filled with faith” and their hearts “sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and bodies washed with pure water” - surely a reference to the water of Baptism. In the old dispensation there was an external sprinkling of water and a cleansing of the body before entering the sanctuary. For us, it must be a cleansing of the inner being, of our thoughts, attitudes, intentions so that they are totally in harmony with God and committed to following the Gospel. There is an echo here of a passage from the prophet Ezekiel: “I will sprinkle clean water upon you to cleanse you from all your impurities, and from all your idols I will cleanse you. I will give you a new heart and place a new spirit within you, taking from your bodies your stony hearts and giving you natural hearts” (Ezek 36:25-26).

We are told to remain steadfast in our hope that God will take care of us because we have confidence in the fidelity of our God to his promises.

Finally, in the reading, we are to be vigilant in our relationships with our brothers and sisters. We are to provoke each other not to anger or hostility but to love and good deeds. As part of this, we must not neglect attending the gatherings of the community (the Eucharist?), as some apparently were doing. The Greek term here suggests abandoning the community and not just a physical absence. Instead, we are to be a constant encouragement to each other, especially as we see the approach of the “Day” (the parousia) of Jesus’ final coming.

There is matter here for us to reflect on - our faith and hope in God, our commitment to Jesus and his Gospel and, especially, on how that affects our relationships with both our fellow Christians and all the people who impinge directly or indirectly on our lives.

Let us learn to appreciate and value our Eucharistic gatherings which are not just the observance of some regulation but a real coming together of people who share the same vision and who wish to support each other in giving an effective witness to the vision of life Jesus has left to us.

GOSPEL (Mark 4:21-25)

We are still with Mark in a section of parables and images. Today we see a number of disparate sayings.

No one lights a lamp and then covers it up. Our Christian faith is a light for the world and not to be kept hidden. Our message is not meant to be kept secret but to be broadcast and shared. How many know that we are Christians? How many see us practise our faith openly? How many are influenced by our living according to the Christian vision? Our faith, our knowledge of Jesus and his Gospel, is not something private to be kept to ourselves. A “good” Catholic is not just one who keeps all the Commandments, goes often to Mass, stays in the “state of grace” but, rather, one who radiates his/her faith, shares it generously with others, is as much concerned with others having the experience of loving and being loved by God that he/she has. If we are not SEEN to be Christians we have somehow failed, no matter how good our inner lives may be. To be a Christian is not just to be a good person but an apostle, an evangeliser, a sharer of faith by word and action.

What we give out to others is what we will ourselves receive – and even more.”To the one who has, more will be given; from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away.” That is what happened to the man who buried his master’s money in the ground so as not to lose it. Those who invested it, got even more in return. In the Christian life, we gain by giving, not be getting. It is only when we give that we can get. When everyone gives, everyone gets.

Week 3 | Friday

Hebrews 10:32-39; Mark 4:26-34

The writer again repeats his exhortation to the ‘Hebrews’ not to give up on the faith to which they gave such strong witness in the past.

He asks them to remember the days when they first heard and “received the light”. This “enlightenment” is an ancient metaphor for baptism but it may also refer to the catechumen’s enlightenment by faith and their experience of salvation.

At that time of their conversion, they had to go through many trials and difficulties, sometimes being “publicly exposed to abuse and persecution” or because of their close connections with people being so treated.

In addition they showed their solidarity and compassion with those Christians who had been thrown into prison because of their faith (a reference to Paul’s imprisonment?). They even happily accepted their possessions being taken away from them in exchange for a treasure that was so much better and more lasting.

It is not time now for them to give up on their former faith and confidence, which brought such great rewards though not of a material kind. They need a spirit of endurance and perseverance in their first faith so that, having carried out God’s will in every way, they will receive the reward that awaits them.

In confirmation of what he is saying the author gives a quotation from the prophet Habakkuk 2:3-4. He uses the Greek text of the Old Testament and inverts two lines from v. 4 of the original and introduces the passage with a few words taken from Is 26:20. Paul, writing to the Romans, also quotes the phrase: “The just (or righteous) person lives by faith” (Rom 1:17).

“Only a little while now, a very little while,

and the One that is coming will have come; he will not delay;

for the righteous one will live by faith. . .”

This reflects the belief, mentioned many times in the New Testament, of the expected final coming of Jesus to take all his faithful followers to their future and unending life face to face with God. The necessary condition was that the Christians maintain their total faith and trust in the promises of God and of Christ.

“. . . but if such a one draws back, my soul will take no pleasure in such a person.”

So, the author says in conclusion, the ‘Hebrews’ and himself are not the kind of people to pull back and so be lost. Rather they are the sort who remain faithful and so win salvation. It is this “pulling back” that the ‘Hebrew’s are threatening to do and he is giving them many reasons why it does not make any sense for them to do so.

We, too, must continue to move ever forward, remaining faithful to the core of the Gospel message and living it out effectively and meaningfully in an ever-changing world.

GOSPEL (Mark 4:26-34)

Here we have the two last parables told by Mark in this part of his gospel. They are both images of the Kingdom of God, of God’s truth and love spreading among people all over the world. They are both taken from the world of agriculture, a world that would have been very familiar to Jesus’ listeners.

In the first, God’s work is compared to a farmer planting seed. As in the parable of the sower, the seed is the Kingdom. Night and day the process of growth continues without any human intervention. Whether the farmer is awake or asleep the process of growth continues. The seed sprouts and grows and he does not know how. The outcome is certain. Once the seed is ripe, it is for the farmer to bring in the harvest. And that is our task: to bring in the harvest which has been planted in the hearts of people. In the words of the other parables, it is up to us to throw the light which helps people see the truth and love of God already present in their deepest being.

In the second parable the Kingdom is compared to a mustard seed. Although one of the tiniest of seeds, it grows into a sizeable shrub in which even birds can build their nests.

Both of these parables are words of encouragement to a struggling Church, living in small, scattered communities and surrounded by hostile elements ready to destroy it. How amazed would the Christians of those days if they could see how the seed has grown and spread to parts of the world of whose very existence they were totally unaware. We today still need to have their trust and confidence in the power of the Kingdom to survive and spread.

Mark says that Jesus spoke many parables, in fact, he only spoke in parables. But the full meaning of his teaching was explained to his inner circles of disciples. Those staying “outside” were not ready to take in the message. They are the ones who were not “hearing”, as Jesus told his disciples to do. How sensitive is my hearing?

Week 3 | Saturday

Hebrews 11:1-2,8-19; Mark 4:35-41

We begin today chapter 11 of Hebrews which is a magnificent hymn on the meaning of faith.

The chapter is summarised by the New American Bible in these words:

This chapter draws upon the people and events of the Old Testament to paint an inspiring portrait of religious faith, firm and unyielding in the face of any obstacles that confront it. These pages rank among the most lofty and eloquent to be found the Bible. They expand the theme announced in 6:12, to which the author now returns (10:39). The material of this chapter is developed chronologically. Verses 3-7 draw up on the first 9 chapters of Genesis; vv. 8-22, upon the period of the patriarchs; vv. 23-31, upon the time of Moses; vv. 32-38, upon the history of the judges, the prophets and the Maccabean martyrs.

The author gives the most extensive description of faith provided in the New Testament, though his interest does not lie in a technical, theological definition. In view of the needs of his audience he describes what authentic faith does, not what it is in itself. Through faith God guarantees the blessings to be hoped for from him, providing evidence in the gift of faith that what he promises will eventually come to pass (1). Because they accepted in faith God’s guarantee of the future, the biblical personages discussed in vv. 3-38 were themselves commended by God (2). Christians have even greater reason to remain firm in faith since they, unlike the Old Testament men and women of faith, have perceived the beginning of God’s fulfilment of his messianic promises (39-40).

Our reading begins with a description of what faith is and then goes on to discuss the faith of Abraham. The faith of some other Israelite heroes will be discussed in next Monday’s reading.

Faith is described in these words: “Only faith can guarantee the blessings that we hope for, or prove the existence of the realities that at present remain unseen.” (Or, as in the New American Bible translation: “Faith is the realisation of what is hoped for and evidence of things not seen.”) We are dealing here with a description of faith and not a theological definition.

Faith and hope deal with realities for which we have no absolutely concrete evidence but they are realities on which we are prepared to base our lives. It does not mean that we have no evidence for these realities; at the same time they are of such a kind that by acting on the basis of their promise we find what we are looking for. It is not just wishful thinking or a wild shot in the dark. No one who has genuinely based their lives on the Gospel message has been disappointed.

The Jewish Christians to whom the Letter is addressed have been discouraged by persecution in the past, so the author emphasises that it is only what is future and what is invisible that concerns hope. The examples from the Old Testament are intended to show how faith is the source of patience and strength.

Indeed, says the author, it was because of their faith in God’s word that the ancestors of the Jews won approval from God. The author then presents some magnificent examples of faith from the Old Testament. He begins with Abel, Enoch and Noah and then goes on to Abraham, who is the subject of our reading. Later, he will speak of Isaac, Joseph, Moses and others. In general, Abraham is presented in the New Testament as the outstanding example of those who live “by faith” and as the “father of all who believe” (e. g. Rom 4:11-12).

Abraham was called out by God from his birthplace deep in what is now southern Iraq and told to go to a strange, far distant land where he would find an inheritance for himself and his descendants. He set out not really knowing where he was going or what was ahead of him. This was his first act of faith.

He arrived, a foreigner and an outsider, in what was to become the Promised Land. Following him were his son, Isaac, and grandson, Jacob, who were heirs of the same promise. They lived in Canaan as nomads taking care of their flocks of sheep and cattle. They looked forward to a permanent base, a city, “founded, designed and built” by God. The “city” speaks of permanence in contrast to the tents in which the patriarch lived. That would not come for quite some time in the form of Jerusalem on Mount Zion, the citadel of King David. But the real city is the “heavenly Jerusalem”, “the city that is to come” and the “new Jerusalem” (Rev 21).

Next, there is the faith of Sarah, Abraham’s wife. She had borne her husband no children and hence no legitimate heirs. Abraham did have a son, Ishmael, by Hagar one of his slave women but he did not count as part of God’s promise. Sarah never lost faith that God would keep his promise about Abraham’s inheritance which could only come through a legitimate son borne by her. And her faith was rewarded when, already well past child-bearing age, she gave birth to Isaac. God’s action was clearly present in this event which was beyond all expectation and yet so crucial for God’s promise to be realised.”Because of this,” says the author of Hebrews, “there came from one man, and one who was already as good as dead himself [100 years old, according to Genesis], more descendants than could be counted, as many as the stars of heaven or the grains of sand on the sea-shore.” The lateness and unlikeliness of the birth only emphasises God’s role in it.

The author then goes on to comment on the examples he has given (including those not in our reading). What these people all had in common was that they died before any of the things which had been promised became a reality.”They saw them in the far distance and welcomed them, recognising that they were only strangers and nomads on earth.” They were nomads not only in the literal sense but in the sense that this world was not destined to be their permanent home.

By speaking in the way they did they make it clear they were in search of their real homeland. They were certainly not talking about the place they came from because they could easily have gone back there. They were on a forward journey from which there was no turning back. They were longing for a better homeland, namely, their “heavenly homeland”.

“That is why God is not ashamed to be called their God, since he has founded the city for them.” That is, he has prepared a lasting home for them, their permanent home with God himself.

The third and final example of faith is when, being put to the test by God, Abraham was told to make a human sacrifice of his only legitimate son, Isaac. In human terms, this did not make any sense at all. Abraham had been promised innumerable descendants but that could only happen by Isaac having sons of his own. With the death of Isaac, the promise had no way of being realised. Yet Abraham, in a supreme act of faith and trust in God keeping his promise, proceeded to carry out God’s command.

We know that, just as Abraham was raising the knife to kill his son, already bound on an altar, an angel of the Lord stopped him and substituted a ram for the sacrifice. Abraham’s extraordinary faith was rewarded and God’s promise was fulfilled - and is still being fulfilled. Says the author: “He was confident that God had the power even to raise from the dead; and so, figuratively speaking, he was given back Isaac from the dead.” Some see in Isaac’s return from virtual death a symbol of Christ’s resurrection.

Clearly, the author of Hebrews tells these stories to encourage those to whom he is writing. Because of their difficulties, their faith is weakening. And, indeed, for the early Church in general, especially in times of great persecution, great faith was needed. This is what the parables of the mustard seed and of the yeast in the dough are about. What would they think of the one billion Christians in the world today?

There are many lessons for us here. In many parts of the world, many Christians are in situations where their faith is under attack in one way or another. In some cases, it may be direct persecution and harassment; in others, it may be the pressure from the surrounding culture. We need to go back to the heart of our faith, the core vision that Jesus handed on to us.

Let us also go forward in faith and trust that God will keep his promises.

GOSPEL (Mark 4:35-41)

After the passage on the parables, Mark continues by narrating four miracle stories, two of them put together in an “inclusion”. There are two messages in today’s story of the calming of the storm at sea.

The first is that the calming of the sea indicates the true identity of Jesus; he has the power of God himself. This question of Jesus’ identity is a major theme of Mark’s gospel.

He speaks to the sea as if it were a living thing, an instrument of the devil, an evil thing. No wonder that the disciples are filled with awe. Their question contains its own answer: “Who then is this whom even wind and sea obey?”, as is clear from passages in the Old Testament, especially in the Psalms:

You still the roaring of the seas, the roaring of their waves (Ps 65:8)

You rule over the surging of the sea; you still the swelling of its waves (Ps 89:10)

More powerful than the roar of many waters, more powerful than the breakers of the sea (Ps 93-34)

He hushed the storm to a gentle breeze, and the billows of the sea were stilled (Ps 107:29).

The second message lies in the symbolism underlying the whole story. It is a story of the early Church. The boat represents a church community. (Our Church is a community of churches.) The surrounding sea is the world. Jesus gets into the boat “just as he was”, that is, a man looking no different from his disciples. There were other boats too. That is, other church communities. Then a violent storm arises and waves threaten to swamp the boat and sink it. This is just what was happening to so many little communities surrounded by hostile elements bent on wiping out the Christian faith.

Where was Jesus during all this? Asleep! Not in the least worried. The disciples scold him: “Teacher (not yet Lord), do you not care that we are all going to be drowned?” How often that complaint must have risen from those tiny, battered communities wondering where their Lord was in all their troubles! Jesus wakes up and tells the wind to be still. And calm returns.

Now they are scolded: “Why were you afraid? Do you not yet have faith?” That is, trust in Jesus’ caring for them. Of course, the real calm is not so much in the sea as in their hearts when they realise that Jesus is not far away, he is not asleep or absent but is with them all the time.

Let us pray for that inner peace that comes from knowing Jesus is always very close to us, no matter what may be going on in our lives.

Week 4 | Monday

Hebrews 11:32-40; Mark 5:1-20

We continue today another part of this wonderful passage about faith and what our Old Testament predecessors were prepared to undergo in order to preserve the integrity of their faith and trust in God. Many of the sufferings described are similar to those experienced by Christian martyrs in later centuries.

The author begins by mentioning some well-known personalities but does not describe particular qualities in detail. Among those mentioned are Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, David, Samuel and “the prophets”.

Gideon, Barak, Samson and Jephthah all appear in the Book of Judges, as leaders of God’s people. David is, of course, King David who succeeded Saul. He is one of the most human and endearing characters in the whole Bible and an ancestor of Jesus. Samuel is the prophet who lived in the time of Saul and David and anointed David as king to succeed Saul (cf. 1 and 2 Samuel).

He then gives a brief list of exploits done for God but without attributing the actions to particular people. His readers would have known well the examples given.

It includes those who:

--conquered kingdoms

--administered justice

--obtained promises

--shut the mouths of lions (Samson, “though unarmed, tore a lion to pieces as one tears a kid”, Judges 14:6; David told Saul that, as a shepherd, he had killed a lion to protect his sheep, 1 Sam 17:34-35; Daniel remained unharmed though cast into a den of lions, Daniel 6:19-23)

--quenched raging fire (the three young men, Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego, friends of Daniel, survived unharmed in the furnace into which Nebuchadnezzar had had them thrown)

--escaped the edge of the sword

--won strength out of weakness (Gideon, who lamented his weakness, is given strength to overcome the Midians, Judges 6:15; Samson, made weak after his hair is cut, destroys the Philistines when it grows again, Judges 16:15-22; also women like Esther who overcame powerful enemies of God’s people)

--became mighty in war (for example, David)

--put foreign armies to flight (again, David)

--women who received their dead by resurrection (the prophet Elijah restores life to the son of the widow of Zarephath in whose house he was given hospitality, 1 Kings 17-24; the prophet Elisha brought the young son of a Shunammite woman back to life, 2 Kings 4:8-37)

--were tortured, refusing to accept release in order to get a better resurrection (among those tortured were Eleazar in 2 Macc 6:18-31, who chose death rather than eat pork and so deny his Jewish faith, or the martyrdom of the seven brothers, killed in front of their mother, for the same reason, 2 Macc 7)

--suffered mocking and flogging, even chains and imprisonment (this may refer to Jeremiah)

--those who were stoned to death, sawn in two, and killed by the sword (according to 2 Chron 24:21, Zechariah, son of Jehoiada the priest, was stoned and legend has it that Jeremiah met the same fate; there was also a legend that Isaiah had been sawn in two by order of King Manasseh)

--those who went about in skins of sheep and goats, destitute, persecuted, tormented

--those who wandered in deserts and mountains, in caves and holes in the ground.

And yet, in spite of these heroic exploits in the service of Yahweh, they “did not receive what was promised”. Only when Jesus came and made his supreme sacrifice to reconcile all of us with God could they also be, together with us, be made perfect. The heroes of the Old Testament obtained their full reward only after the saving work of Christ had been accomplished. This is the meaning of Jesus, after his death, descending to Sheol, the place of the dead, and bringing all of these people with him to glory. After the death of Jesus, Matthew tells us, “the tombs also were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised” (Matt 25:52) and “He was put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit, in which also he went and made a proclamation to the saints in prison” (1 Pet 3:18-19).

Now, however, they already enjoy what we Christians who are still struggling do not yet possess in its fullness. Although we live in the age of Jesus, we still have to prove ourselves by our faith and the record of our lives lived in that faith. But we have many models in both the Old Testament and in Christian times to inspire us.

Mark 5:1-20

Today we see Mark at his best. A story full of drama and excitement. Compare the very bland version in Matthew (where, for some reason, there are two men.) It takes place in the “country of the Gerasenes” which was Gentile territory.

There was a man who was possessed by several demons (“My name is Legion for there are many of us.”) He was absolutely uncontrollable, could smash through chains and lived in isolated places, an outcast and a source of fear to people everywhere.

But when Jesus appears, it is the demons’ turn to fear. They begged not to be sent out of that district. (As Gentile territory was it fertile ground for their activities, a Screwtape’s paradise?) They offer a deal. They ask to be allowed to enter a herd of pigs. The presence of pigs indicates this was Gentile territory. Their request is granted. Once possessed, the pigs, 2,000 of them, went berserk and hurtled down a cliff into the lake and were drowned.

To the thinking of many today, this seems like a terrible waste of good pigs. How could Jesus do such a thing? But we need to remember that this was written in a Jewish context where pigs were regarded as unclean and to be avoided at all costs. We remember how the Prodigal Son was condemned in his hunger to get a job tending pigs and even to eating their food. For a Jew, this was the very lowest any human could go in terms of humiliation and degradation. So getting rid of these pigs was no big deal. A case of good riddance. A better place to put evil spirits could not be imagined!

On the other hand, the swineherds were naturally upset at losing their means of livelihood and went back to the towns to announce what had happened. The people came out to see this extraordinary happening. They found Jesus and the man, perfectly composed and fully dressed. And they were afraid. Naturally, they realised that, in Jesus, they were in the presence of Someone very special who had such powers. They were also very upset that their herds of pigs had been destroyed and, not surprisingly, they begged Jesus to go elsewhere.

The man, however, asked to follow Jesus. Jesus’ response is interesting. He said to the man, “Go home to your people and tell them all that the Lord in his mercy has done for you.” This was, in fact, another kind of following. And is a message each of us can hear.

Some of us think that following Jesus means spending a lot of time “with Jesus” in religious activities or joining the priesthood or religious life. For most of us, our calling and our following of Jesus takes place right where we are. It is there that we need to share with others our experience of knowing and being loved by Jesus. Let us go home and tell others what Jesus means in our lives. And, like the people in the Gospel, they may be amazed.

Week 4 | Tuesday

Hebrews 12:1-4; Mark 5:21-43

More words of encouragement today for the ‘Hebrews’ to whom this letter addressed, urging them to remain faithful to their Christian calling and not to be tempted to fall back to the old ways.

First, the author reminds them of the “great cloud” of witnesses to the faith. He is referring to that impressive list of Old Testament heroes mentioned in the previous chapter, some of whom we saw in the readings of the past two days. The Greek term for “witnesses” (martyres) gives us our English-language word for “martyr”.

The imagery here suggests an athletic contest in a great amphitheatre. But the witnesses in this case are not mere spectators but inspiring examples. They bear witness (as “martyrs”) to the power of faith and God’s faithfulness.

The ‘Hebrew’ should follow in their footsteps and lay aside every obstacle, especially sin which can be so difficult to shake off. Instead, let them “run with perseverance the race” that is set before them. Paul in his First Letter to the Corinthians uses a similar image: “Run in such a way that you may win the prize. . . I do not run aimlessly nor do I box as though beating the air” (1 Cor 9:24,26). Again, to the Philippians: “I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith” (Phil 4:7). This is precisely what the author is telling his readers to do.

We may say, too, that Christian life is pictured as a long-distance race rather than a short sprint. Some Hebrew Christians were tempted to drop out of the contest because of persecution and obstacles to the practice of their faith. (Were they among those pestered by the ‘Judaisers’ Paul speaks about in the Letter to the Galatians?)

As their model, they are to look to Jesus the “pioneer and perfecter” of their faith. He both leads the way in showing how to lead a life of faith and, through his death, at the same time gives the strength and grace for them fully to develop their own faith.

Just as a runner concentrates on the finishing line, we should concentrate on Jesus, the goal and objective of our faith (Phil 3:13-14). Jesus is both the start and the end of the race. He is also the supreme witness who has already run the race and overcome.

Jesus set a marvellous example. In order to reach the unending joy and happiness which was offered to him, he underwent the appalling pain of the cross and despised the terrible shame of such a death, hanging naked in a public place as a criminal. Because of this, he now sits at the right hand of the throne of God. If they (and we) follow in his footsteps, they, too, can be with Jesus sharing the same glory.

And, whenever they are tempted to give up or lose heart, let them remember “him who endured such hostility against himself from sinners”, from sinners like them - and us.

Finally, he reminds them that - unlike their Master and Lord Jesus and many other martyrs - they have not yet been asked to shed their blood in their living out of the Gospel. They may have been persecuted and even lost their possessions but they have not had to die for their faith.

The whole passage can be applied word for word to our own situation.

Mark 5:21-43

Today’s passage illustrates a feature of Mark’s gospel – inclusion, where one passage is contained inside another. Today we have two miracles, with one of them narrated inside the other. Again we are told of large crowds gathering around Jesus on the shore as once again he crosses the lake.

A synagogue official, Jairus, approaches and begs Jesus to lay his healing hands on his daughter who is very ill. Such a person was responsible for conducting services at the synagogue and keeping order. Sometimes the title was honorary without any administrative responsibility.

He asks Jesus to come and lay his healing hands on her, as he has done for so many others. As Jesus makes his way to the house followed by a large crowd, there is a woman who had been hemorrhaging for 12 years. She had tried every kind of medical treatment but in vain; in fact, she was getting worse. Apart from the distress caused by the ailment, her bleeding rendered her ritually unclean. If the people around her knew of her condition she might have been attacked. Hence her great anxiety to approach Jesus without being identified or drawing attention.

She had this tremendous faith that, just by touching the hem of Jesus’ garment, she would be healed. And she was – immediately. In both cases, there was a deep conviction that physical contact together with faith in Jesus’ power to heal would bring about a cure. It is important for us to recover the connection between physical touch and healing.

Jesus was aware that something had happened, “aware that power had gone out from him”. His disciples naturally wondered how he could say this when so many people were pressing in on him.

In fear and trembling, probably more afraid of the crowd than of Jesus, the woman identified herself. She then hears the beautiful words: “Your faith [your total trust in me] has restored you to health; go in peace and be free from your complaint.” Peace indeed. Not only was she physically cured but she could now mix freely with people again. She was fully restored to society and her community, without shame, without having to hide.

Now we resume the first story. Messengers come to say that Jairus’ daughter has died. There is no need to bother Jesus any more. Jesus urges Jairus to keep believing. As he approaches the house, he separates from the crowd and brings only Peter, James and John with him as witnesses to a very special event. The house is full of mourners, wailing and weeping in the customary way.

“What’s all the fuss about? The child is not dead, only asleep.” In so speaking, Jesus is not denying the child’s real death, but it is an assurance that she will be wakened from her sleep of death. Death in the Old Testament is often described as sleep. And we, too, read on gravestones that so-and-so “went to sleep in the Lord”.

The crowd, often portrayed as so supportive of Jesus, here are shown as incredulous. They laugh at him. So everyone is put out of the room except the child’s parents and Jesus’ his three companions. Taking the girl by the hand, he says: “Little girl, I tell you get up [rise].” The words suggest resurrection to new life. Immediately the girl got up and began to walk around. She was just 12 years old.

Those present are “overcome with astonishment” and are told not to say anything to anyone and reminded to give the poor girl some food. This is another step in the unfolding of Jesus’ true identity while at the same time he does not want that identity to be made public at this stage.

Week 4 | Wednesday

Hebrews 12:4-7,11-15; Mark 6:1-6

Today Hebrews has a very important lesson. It tells us how to look at the pains and sufferings that occur in our life. We should not be discouraged by such experiences nor should we take such things lightly.

The reading opens with the concluding verse of yesterday’s reading, where the author reminds the ‘Hebrews’ that in their struggle against sin, they have not yet been called on to shed their blood (as the martyrs did). The “struggle” evokes a boxing match or a military conflict.

He reminds them with an exhortation that is taken from the Book of Proverbs (3:11-12, quoting from the Greek or Septuagint text) and in which they are addressed lovingly as “children”, but children who need correction.

Proverbs urges that any punishment that comes from the Lord should not be taken lightly. At the same time one should not become despondent because of such punishment. The reason is clear: “The Lord disciplines those whom he loves; he chastises every child he recognises as his own.”

Clearly, the ‘Hebrews’ felt that their trials were a form of punishment or rejection by God. On the contrary, they are urged to endure their trials from God as a form of discipline or training.

They need to realise that the trials they are undergoing are because God is treating them as children whom he dearly loves. Are there any parents who do not discipline their children? Especially when those children are acting out of line? Not to discipline misbehaving children is to spoil them and guarantee they will not turn out well. It is not a sign of real love.

Of course, discipline at the time seems painful and may be resented but, later, it is appreciated because of its formative effects.”To those who have been trained by it, it bears fruit in peace and goodness.” So the ‘Hebrews’ are told to hold up their limp arms, steady their trembling knees and smooth out the path they tread. They are not to slump into a kind of despair and feeling of being abandoned. The phrase comes from Isaiah: “Strengthen the hands that are feeble, make firm the knees that are weak” (Is 35:3). If they do accept the trials they are sent, “then the injured limb will not be sprained, it will grow strong again.” It is exercise, not passivity, that restores strength to damaged limbs.

God’s love is in fact present in every single experience, both good and bad. At the time it can be difficult to see this but, later on, we may be able to see a real good in what happened e. g. a stint in hospital, the loss of a loved person. A serious sickness can help one to re-evaluate the quality and direction of one’s life. As Paul says: “Everything works together for those who love God.”

The final lesson is wise advice: “Always be wanting peace with all people, and the holiness without which no one can ever see the Lord.” It is an echo of the Beatitude: “Blessed are the peacemakers; they shall be called children of God.”

The reason for this is not just to have peace in one’s own life but to bring peace into the lives of others.”Be careful that no one is deprived of the loving grace of God and that no root of bitterness should begin to grow and make trouble; this can poison a whole community.” A peace-filled person can be a source of much strength to people in need of affirmation and support.

We may not be able to avoid pain coming into our own lives but we should never be the source of pain in the lives of other people.

Mark 6:1-6

Jesus returns to his home town in the company of his disciples. On the Sabbath day, as was his right, he began teaching in the synagogue. His listeners, who all knew him since he was a child, are staggered at the way he speaks.”Where did the man get all this? What is this wisdom that has been granted him and these miracles that are worked through him?” He had no more education than any of his fellow-villagers. But the point is that they do recognise his wisdom and his power to perform miracles. Yet, he is “only” a carpenter, the son of Mary and related to James and Joset and Jude and Simon and with “sisters” as well.

And, because they knew him so well, they could not accept him. They deliberately chose not to see what was happening before their eyes. This, of course, is the irony of the whole situation. They did not know him at all. They were blinded by a superficial familiarity. So Jesus says, “A prophet is only despised in his own country, among his own relations, and in his own house.” A saying known in other cultures and an experience all too often repeated in our own day. In comparing himself to the Hebrew prophets who went before him, Jesus foreshadows his ultimate rejection by many of his own people. We have already seen his problems with his own family and now with his townspeople. It is not the end.

The trap of familiarity is one we can all fall into very easily. How many times have we failed to recognise the voice of Jesus speaking to us because the person is someone we meet every day, a person we may not like or despise? But God can and does talk to us through all kinds of people, Catholic or not, relative, friend, colleague, our own children, total stranger, educated, uneducated…

As a result, we are told, Jesus not only did not but “could not” work any miracles there, except for a few sick people who were cured by the laying of hands. But he could not help those who had no faith in him. Jesus works only when we cooperate and open ourselves to him. Mark often says how amazed the people are at Jesus’ teaching. Now it is Jesus” turn to be amazed at his home town’s lack of faith and trust in him.

Week 4 | Thursday

Hebrews 12:18-19,21-24; Mark 6:7-13

The reading gives a striking contrast between the appearance of God on Mount Sinai and the God that comes to us in Jesus Christ. It is another word of discouragement to the ‘Hebrews’ who want to go back to the old dispensation. They are being reminded of just what they want to go back to and what they are to leave behind.

This remarkably beautiful passage contrasts two great assemblies of people: that of the Israelites gathered at Mt Sinai for the sealing of the old covenant and the promulgation of the Mosaic Law, and that of the followers of Jesus gathered at ‘Mt Zion, the heavenly Jerusalem’, the assembly of the ‘new covenant’. This latter scene, marked by the presence of ‘countless angels’ and of ‘Jesus’ with his ‘redeeming blood’ is reminiscent of the celestial liturgies of the Book of Revelation. (New American Bible)

The approach to God no longer occurs in an awe-inspiring theophany as on Sinai but in a city built by God, for which the Old Testament saints yearned, the heavenly city. With the angels are assembled round the triumphant Mediator all Christians, whom he has sanctified and made perfect.

In approaching God through Jesus, the Christians do not have to go through the experience that the Israelites had at the foot of Mount Sinai, where Moses received the Law from Yahweh and where the covenant between Yahweh and his people was sealed. That was a truly awesome and frightening theophany.

Some of its features are listed here: the blazing fire, the darkness and gloom, the thunder and lightning, the sound of the trumpet and the voice that spoke from the cloud “whose words made the hearers beg that not another word be spoken to them”. For, in a verse omitted in today’s reading, we are told “they could not endure the order that was given: ‘If even an animal touches the mountain, it shall be stoned to death’” and, impatient with Moses’ delay in coming back made the golden calf as an idol. In fact, so terrifying was the sight of this idolatrous image that even Moses, who had spoken face to face with Yahweh, admitted that he trembled with fear.

But the situation of Christ’s followers is completely different. The author tells the ‘Hebrews’ (using very traditional terms but in a very different sense) that they have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem and “to innumerable angels in festal gathering”. The original Mount Zion was Jerusalem, the site of the Temple in whose sanctuary Yahweh dwelt. Here the author speaks of the “new Jerusalem”.

They have come to the assembly of the first-born who are enrolled in heaven. These are all those who have identified themselves with Jesus as his disciples and identify with the New Covenant.

They come to God the Judge of all and to “the spirits of the righteous now made perfect”. This last phrase would appear to apply to the “righteous” in the Old Testament who are now given final deliverance and redemption through the saving death of Christ on the Cross (cf. Matt 27:52).

And, most of all, they have come to Jesus, “the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel”. When Abel was killed by his brother Cain, his blood cried out to God for vengeance (Gen 4:10). His was the first recorded murder in the Bible and, in addition, was the blood of a good and innocent man. But the innocent blood of Jesus, poured out on the Cross, is far more powerful. Abel’s blood cried out from the earth for vengeance, but the blood of Jesus has opened the way for everyone, providing cleansing and access to God. The blood of Jesus brings not vengeance but forgiveness and reconciliation.

The awesomeness of Sinai was one that overpowered the senses. The awesomeness of our Christian faith is in the radical change it can bring about in our lives when we surrender ourselves totally to the Way to God that Jesus has shown. Our Saviour is “meek and humble of heart” and intimately accessible at all times. His favourite words are: “Do not be afraid.”

Mark 6:7-13

We now reach a new stage in the formation of Jesus’ disciples. There was a calling of the first disciples to be “fishers of people”, then the choosing of twelve who would share in the very work of Jesus. Now the Twelve, the foundation of the future community, are being sent out to do exactly the same work that Jesus has been doing.

They have been given authority over unclean spirits, they preach repentance – that radical conversion (metanoia) to the vision of the Kingdom, anointing the sick with oil and healing them. Notice that these three activities cover the whole person: spiritual, mental and physical. Healing and wholeness, health and holiness. To be holy is to be whole.

They are instructed to travel lightly, bringing only what they absolutely need. No food or money or even a change of clothes. They will not need these things because they will be taken care of by the people they serve. They are to stay in the first house that takes them in. Overall, they are to show total dependence on and trust in God. This is freedom at its best. A model repeated by many saints and founders of religious congregations. (One thinks of such disparate cases as St Ignatius Loyola, Mother Teresa, the community in the book The Cross and the Switchblade.)

Do we really need all the baggage we carry through life? As someone has said: Those are really rich whose needs are the least. That is what Jesus is teaching us. And, of course, he was a living example.

The disciples went off and did the three central works of Jesus:

- They proclaimed the Kingdom and called for a radical change of heart from people so that they might see life in the way that Jesus, the Son of God, was proclaiming.

- They liberated many people from evil influences and compulsions. Freedom is of the essence of Christian discipleship.

- They anointed the sick with soothing oil and brought them healing and wholeness.

They not only preached the Kingdom; they made it a reality in people’s lives.

This is what we too are all called to do within the circumstances of our life. Having little but giving much.

Week 4 | Friday

Hebrews 13:1-8; Mark 6:14-29

As we come to the end of the Letter there are the usual pieces of practical advice, each one calling for personal reflection.

The ‘Hebrews’ are instructed to:

Love each other like brothers and sisters, a central teaching of the New Testament. At the Last Supper Jesus gave his “new” commandment: “Love one another as I have loved you. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another” (John 13:34-35). If our every word, action and relationship is based on this commandment, we cannot go wrong. See also Paul’s famous hymn to love in 1 Cor 13 and chaps. 3 and 4 of 1 John.

Welcome strangers; they may be entertaining an angel without knowing it. As happened to Abraham when he offered the hospitality of his home to three strangers. The same ‘angels’ were also received in the house of Lot, who lived in Sodom (Gen 18 and 19). Similarly Gideon (ch. 6) and Manoah (ch. 13) in the Book of Judges entertained people who were in fact God’s messengers. We, of course, are called on to recognise the presence of Christ in every person and most of all, in the needy stranger (Matt 25:40).

Remember those who are in prison and empathise with their situation. God loves them too, no matter what they may have done.”I was in prison and you visited me” (Matt 25:36). The reason for the imprisonment is not mentioned; it seems not to be a relevant factor.

Remember those being abused or oppressed in any way. Again, such people are to be treated in the way one would like to be treated oneself if in such a situation.

Respect the marriages of others and maintain the fidelity of their own. Fornication and adultery will bring down God’s judgement; such behaviour is not for Christians.

Remove monetary greed from their lives and be content with what they have. Jesus had said: “Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; for one’s life does not consist in abundance of possessions” (Luke 12:15), and Paul: “I have learnt to be content with what I have” (Phil 4:11). The reason is that God looks after his own. This is especially true when we belong to a good community; everyone will take care of everyone else. So the author quotes from Ps 118 in support of what he is saying: “The Lord is my helper; I will not be afraid. What can anyone do to me?”

Finally, there is a call to respect those leaders, who brought the Word of God to them. They may be already dead but the memory of their lives are models for them to follow.

He sums up his teaching by reminding them that the Risen Jesus is still with them: “He is the same today as he was yesterday and as he will be for ever”. The Jesus they know in their present Christian life is exactly the same as the Jesus of “yesterday” who walked the roads of Galilee, preached his Gospel, died on the Cross and rose again. And he is the same Jesus whom they will meet in the life to come.

For them now to compromise Jesus’ absolute supremacy by going back to the ways of the old dispensation, the old priesthood and rituals is to turn their backs on something far more assuring - the redemptive life and work of Jesus, the Son of God.

The instructions here are just as relevant for us today as they were for the ‘Hebrews’ to whom this Letter was addressed.

Mark 6:14-29

Jesus was now becoming well known over a wide area. There was much speculation as to who he was (a major theme of Mark’s gospel). Some were suggesting that he was John the Baptist (who had by this time been executed) come to life again, or that he was the prophet Elijah, who was expected to return just before the coming of the Messiah, or that he was a prophet in his own right, “like the prophets we used to have”. We know, of course, that all those speculations were wrong. The true answer will emerge very soon.

King Herod, steeped in superstition and full of fear and guilt was convinced that Jesus was a re-incarnation of John the Baptist whom he had beheaded. We then get the story as to how this happened.

Herod Antipas, also known as Herod the Tetrarch, was the son of Herod the Great, who was king when Jesus was born. When the older Herod died his kingdom was divided among his three surviving sons. Archelaus received half of the territory, Herod Antipas became ruler of Galilee and Perea, while Philip was the ruler of the northern territory on the east side of the Jordan. The title ‘Tetrarch’ indicates that he was ruler of one quarter of the whole territory.

It is clear that Herod had great respect for John as he would also have for Jesus later on. The problem arose because of John had denounced Herod’s taking the wife of his half-brother Herod Boethus, as his wife. This was in clear violation of Jewish law. The historian Josephus also says that Herod feared that John, so popular with the people, might instigate a riot against him.

It was this woman, Herodias, who now wanted to be rid of John but could not do so because of Herod’s respect for John. Herod had gone as far as arresting John but even when John was in prison, Herod loved to listen to him even though he was puzzled by John’s preaching.

Herodias saw her opportunity when Herod threw a party for his court to celebrate his birthday. She knew her husband’s weaknesses. Herodias’s daughter was brought in to dance and utterly captivated Herod. Deep in his cups, he made a rash promise. He would give her anything, even half of the territory he governed. Under the prompting of the mother, the girl makes the gruesome request for John’s head on a dish.

Herod was aghast but because of his oath and the presence of his guests, he dared not renege on his promise. John was beheaded and the head given to the mother. John’s disciples then take the body and give it a decent burial.

We might notice some similarities between this story and the passion of Jesus:

Both Herod and Pilate recognised in John and Jesus respectively people of obvious goodness of life, wisdom and integrity. The hatred of Herodias for John parallels the hatred of the Jewish leaders for Jesus – both called for execution by the ruler (Herod in one case, Pilate in the other). After the deaths of John and Jesus, disciples asked and received permission for a decent burial.

John is the precursor of Jesus not only in announcing the coming of Jesus but also in giving his life for the integrity of his beliefs and in bringing God’s message to the people.

We are called to do the same. To prepare the way for Jesus and his message must become an integral part of every Christian’s life. Without our cooperation, without our going ahead of Jesus, his message will not be heard.

Week 4 | Saturday

Hebrew 13:15-17,20-21; Mark 6:30-34

Today we conclude our reading of the Letter to the Hebrews.

The first part of today’s reading gives some more instruction on how the ‘Hebrews’ ought to behave:

First, they are to offer God an unending sacrifice of praise, not now a sacrifice of animals but a verbal offering of praise that is made every time they acknowledge God’s name.

Second, they are to keep doing good works and sharing their resources, for instance, with other Christian communities in need of assistance and support. Both of these are “sacrifices that please God”. And, in fact, they are a good summary of what the Christian life should be - a combination of prayer and worship together with a never-ending love and service of brothers and sisters.

Third, they are to obey the leaders of their Christian communities who are pastorally responsible for them and have to give an account of how well they carry out their responsibilities. Here the author is speaking of their present leaders and not those “first leaders” he mentioned earlier and who are dead. Clearly, dictatorial leadership is not condoned by this command. Respect for authority, orderliness and discipline in the church are taught throughout the New Testament.

This obedience should be given willingly and joyfully and “not with sighing”. Their cooperation should make following the leadership a source of joy for them rather than something burdensome, in which case all are the losers. The purpose of obedience is not to dominate people but to get all to work together in commitment to a common goal.

The letter ends with a really beautiful prayer and blessing:

I pray that the God of peace,

who brought our Lord Jesus back from the dead,

by the blood that sealed an eternal covenant,

may make you ready to do his will

in any kind of good action;

and turn us all into whatever is acceptable to himself

through Jesus Christ,

to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.

These verses constitute one of the most beautiful blessings in the New Testament. It is the only place in the Letter where the resurrection of Jesus is explicitly mentioned although the author frequently speaks of the ‘exaltation’ of Jesus and of his presence before the ‘heavenly Throne’.

It is a fitting end to this uplifting letter, a letter written to a community weighed down by discouragement and tempted to go back to their ancestral ways. Let us also find in it encouragement for the difficulties we face.

Mark 6:30-34

The Twelve came back from their mission full of excitement at all they had done and taught. Jesus now told them to withdraw for a while for reflection and rest. This is what Jesus himself used to do. Large crowds were still mobbing Jesus and perhaps some of the apostles too so that they did not even have time to eat. This could have been a real time of temptation as the apostles began to glory in their new-found power and the resultant fame and popularity.

We also see here once more the balance in Jesus’ life. He was so available to all those in need, the poor, the sick, the outcasts but there was a limit to his availability. He knew when he needed to get away, to renew contact with his Father, to recharge his batteries (cf. Mk 1:35-37).

Some people are too self-centred and have a very poor awareness of other people’s needs and do not bother to meet them. On the other hand, there are those who need to be needed, their need is to have people looking constantly for them but the result can often be ‘burnout’ or breakdowns. There are times when we have to learn to be able to say No without feeling guilty.

So Jesus and his disciples take off in a boat to a solitary place where they will be left to themselves. Or that is what they thought. But the people saw them leaving and had a good idea where they were headed. While Jesus and his disciples crossed the lake in a boat, the people hurried along the lakeshore. When Jesus stepped out of the boat, he was faced by a huge crowd.

Jesus quickly decides that this is a time for availability. He is deeply moved by the people’s need, they were like lost sheep in need of a shepherd’s guidance. The people coming out to a desert place echoes the people of Israel in their wanderings. Here Jesus is the Shepherd of the New Israel. So he begins to teach them. Their first hunger was spiritual. They needed to understand what Jesus stood for and why he did the things he did. There is a eucharistic connection here and in what follows (the multiplication of loaves) and the teaching corresponds to what we now call the Liturgy of the Word during the Eucharist.

The story illustrates well the balance in Jesus’ life. As he did himself, he urges his disciples to retire and reflect on the meaning of what they are doing. Otherwise they may become active for activity’s sake or for other less worthy motives. At the same time, in this particular situation, Jesus sees that a response is called for. The day of reflection is abandoned and the people in their great need are served. Let us learn, through careful discernment, to do likewise. To do the right thing at the right time.

Week 5 | Monday

Genesis 1:1-19; Mark 6:53-56

Today we begin reading the Book of Genesis and the story of Creation.

Although it is at the beginning of the Bible that does not mean that it was the first book to be written, still less that it represents an “eyewitness account”. In fact, experts distinguish a combination of accounts written at different times. In the final form in which we now have it, it is a later, sophisticated work, written with a specific purpose in mind. It is not a scientific account and it does not clash with more recent scientific discoveries because it is written on a completely different level.

It is more about God and our relationship with God than about how the world actually came to be. The central message is: There is only one God and he is the source of all that is; he is totally good and everything he creates is good.

It acts as an introduction to the five books of the Pentateuch, the Law of Israel, and shows how God brought order into an already existing but chaotic universe. (Creation from nothing is a later idea.)

In our present selection of readings we only cover the first 11 chapters, which deal with what is called the ‘primeval history’ or pre-history, the Creation, the various ‘falls’ and ending with the incident of the Tower of Babel. The rest of Genesis is concerned with Abraham and his immediate descendants - Isaac, Jacob and Joseph and his brothers. (That part of the book is covered in Weeks 12-14 of Year I.) The last word of Genesis is ‘Egypt’ and leads immediately into the Book of the Exodus, describing a much later period, where we find the Israelites living in Egypt.

Today’s reading begins with God bringing into existence what we might call the infrastructure of our world. This section introduces the whole Pentateuch and in a way the whole Bible. It shows how God brought an orderly universe out of primordial chaos. It forms a background for the call of Abram and the real beginning of the biblical story in chapter 12.

This first version of the creation story is attributed to the Priestly source. As such it is less detailed and more theological. Its primary focus is on God’s role. It aims at a complete logical classification of beings whose creation is deliberately fitted into the framework of a week which closes with the Sabbath day of rest. The text makes use of the primitive science of its day. It would be a mistake to look for points of agreement between the picture given here and the data of modern science. (Hence, the futility of the debate between the so-called ‘Creationists’ and ‘Evolutionists’.)

The text uses a scenario found in other creation myth stories but the emphasis here is very much on our world as the creative work of one, transcendent and all-good God existing before the world he brought into being.

Recounting the origin of the cosmos and its glorious centrepiece, earth, it shows God masterfully orchestrating the events of creation. Each phase follows more or less the same basic pattern established on Day One: divine command, result, divine approval, enumeration of the day. The effect is anything but monotonous. Like a musical theme with variations, the story shows the world gradually becoming more mobile and complex, until, by the sixth day, it is ready for self-perpetuation through procreation. (Harper-Collins Study Bible)

“In the beginning” is not seen as a beginning from infinity as suggested by the opening of John’s gospel, “In the beginning was the Word. . .” (John 1:1). It is not a creation from nothing; it is the beginning of recorded history rather than the origin of being which the philosophers seek to understand. The earth was a formless void and darkness covered the abyss/deep. There was a total lack of order and no light. God was absent.

A “divine wind” hovered over the chaotic watery wastes of the deep. This is not the creative wind of the Spirit. Creation is said to have been brought into being either by the “word” or the “act” of God. But other translators do see the Spirit of God present in the phrase.

The deep or the abyss is the primordial ocean according to the ancient Semitic understanding of the universe. After God’s creative activity, part of this vast body forms the salt-water seas (vv. 9f); part of it is the fresh water under the earth (Ps 33:7; Ezek 31:4), which wells forth on the earth as springs and fountains (Gen 7:11; 8:2; Prov 3:20). Part of it, “the upper water” (Ps 148:4; Dan 3:60), is held up by the dome of the sky (Gen 1:6ff) from which rain descends on the earth (Gen 7:11; 2 Kings 7:2,19; Ps 104:13).

The rest of today’s reading deals with the first four days of creation. First, there is light but the sources of the light are not yet mentioned. Light is created but not darkness, which is a purely negative concept. The creation of light is mentioned first, since the succession of days and nights is to be the frame in which the work of creation takes place. God saw the light as good and God separated light from darkness. It was “good” in the sense of being both acceptable and also intrinsically good. The light was called Day and the darkness Night.

“There was evening and morning, the first day.” In ancient Israel a day was considered to begin at sunset. According to the highly artificial structure of the creation story, God’s activity is divided into six days to teach the sacredness of the Sabbath rest on the seventh day in the Israelite religion. (We might remember, too, how in the Gospel the Sabbath begins on the evening of Friday. That was why Jesus had to be buried before sundown on Good Friday, when the Sabbath would begin (cf. Mark 15:42)

On each of the succeeding days the same formula will be followed:

- “God said: Let there be. . .”

- What was commanded comes into being

- God sees that his work is good

- The number of the day is given

God then made a dome or vault in the midst of the waters, separating waters from waters. The vault, that is, the sky or the heavens, now divided the waters above the dome from the waters below. This is the universe as the ancients understood it in their visual observations from a vantage point they believed to be the centre: a flat earth and a curved and solid heavenly dome surrounded above and below by primordial waters. The water below produced springs from which rivers and lakes originated; the water above explained the rain which came through apertures in the vault. (The understanding of cloud-forming evaporation was still centuries away!)

Evening and morning made the second day.

The waters under heaven now are brought together and reveal dry land, thus producing ‘earth’ and ‘seas’. God saw it was good.

Next vegetation and plants appear bearing all kinds of fruits and seeds. (What is remarkable is that the succession of creations harmonises with a contemporary understanding of evolution: vegetation, swarming creatures, fish, birds, animals [mammals] and human beings.)

Again, God saw it was good. Evening and morning, it is the third day.

Lights are now created in the vault or dome to divide the day from the night. Light has already been created but now its dissemination is divided among the heavenly bodies. These will also mark seasons, days and years and give light to the earth. There is one great light to rule the day and a lesser one to rule the night, as well as the stars - to separate light from darkness. The names ‘sun’ and ‘moon’ are deliberately omitted because these were often treated as gods by neighbouring peoples. For God’s people they are no more than heavenly lamps dividing day and night and marking the seasons and times for festivals.

God saw it was good. Even and morning it is the fourth day.

Through all this there is the underlying refrain: “God saw that it was good.” The message is clear: there is only one God and he is totally good and everything he does is good, very good. Why then is there so much evil and suffering in the world? The answer to that question will come later.

Mark 6:53-56

Last Saturday we saw Jesus and the Twelve landing at a remote place by the lakeshore to spend a day of quietness and reflection. But, as soon as they disembarked, they were met by a huge number of people for whom Jesus, as their Shepherd, was filled with the deepest compassion. After teaching them at length, he arranged with his disciples for the 5,000 people there to be fed. After this, the disciples were sent off in their boat to Bethsaida. On the way, they ran into a huge storm. In the middle of it Jesus appeared walking on the water. When he got into the boat and commanded the wind and the waves there was total calm. In our weekday readings from Mark, these two scenes are passed over at this point.

Today we have a passage summarising what Jesus was doing for the people. It indicates the tremendous hunger of the people to be cured and made whole by Jesus. The people recognise him immediately and go everywhere bringing along those in need of healing. Jesus, in turn, was visiting towns and villages. The sick, strong in their faith, only asked to be allowed to touch the edges of his outer garment and everyone who touched him was cured.

Let us pray that our influence on others at home, at work and elsewhere may have a truly healing effect.

Week 5 | Tuesday

Genesis 1:20-2:4; Mark 7:1-13

God completes the work of creation we were considering in yesterday’s reading.

On the fifth day he creates swarms of living creatures from the waters (rivers and seas, salt and fresh water are not distinguished) and the birds of the air. These include the great “sea monsters” and every other kind of creature to be found in the waters everywhere as well as every kind of “winged bird” (that is, everything that flies, including insects).

The Hebrew word for ‘create’ (bara’) is a verb whose only subject can be God. There are three objects of creation mentioned: the universe as a whole, sea monsters controlling the waters, and human beings, who control the land.

God saw that what he had made was good. He told both water creatures and birds to be fruitful and multiply on the earth.

Evening and morning, the fifth day.

On the sixth day it is the turn for land-based creatures - all kinds of domestic animals (cattle, sheep), creeping things (reptiles, snakes, insects and small animals), and wild animals. It was God who brought all these into being. And he saw that they were good.

Also on the sixth day he creates human beings.”Let us make Man in our likeness.” This certainly does not denote many gods but God taken together with the retinue of the divine court. The plural can also express the majesty and fullness of God’s being and the common name for God in Hebrew is elohim, a plural form. (It is within living memory that the pope and the British queen spoke as ‘we’.)

The word “man” in our reading is a collective noun for the whole human race, male and female, and so we read later in the sentence, “let them be masters. . .”. (The NRSV is more accurate in using the term ‘humankind’ here.)

“In our image.” The human image in some paradoxical way resembles a God who has no visual image - perhaps in his speech, his intelligence and moral sense. We should note the opposite, namely, that the Bible does not hesitate to depict divine manifestations in human form. God is even presented with human feelings - sadness, disappointment, anger, vengeance. . . This close relationship with God distinguishes human beings from the animals; it also involves a distant sharing in God’s nature: intellect, will, dominion and authority. We are like God in our access to truth and wisdom, if on an infinitely lower level. We are like God in our ability to love. All this paves the way for an even higher image: our sharing in the divine nature through the gift of grace (God’s love experienced and active in our lives).

Being in God’s image, humankind is given dominion over all other living things, including wild animals - in the sea, on land and in the air.

Now we have the first piece of poetry in the Bible, 40 per cent of which is poetry:

God created humankind (adam) in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.

“Male and female God created them.” Both male and female are created equally in the image of God, who is beyond gender and inclusive of both. (Compare the later narrative of woman’s creation, cf. Thursday’s reading.)

They, too, are told to increase and multiply, to fill the earth and be responsible for it and for all the animals, birds and living things within it. And to humans and all the fish, animals and birds are given the fruits and seeds of every tree and plant. It is a description of a golden - and vegetarian - age, when human beings and animals were at peace with each other, all having only plants for their food. That will change with the coming of Noah (Gen 9:3).

Finally, “God saw everything that he had made and it was very good.”

Evening and morning the sixth day.

The work of creation of both heavens and earth is now finished, completed in the six days when work was allowed. With his work completed, God rested on the seventh day. And in this way God blessed the seventh day and made it “holy”, because on that day he had rested from his work of creation. In future, his people would work on six days but would, in imitation of Yahweh, “keep holy the Sabbath day”. It would be a day of prayer and worship and of rest from all kinds of work.

The Sabbath (shabbat) is of divine institution, for on that day God himself rested. The word shabbat is avoided here since, according to the Priestly author, the Sabbath was not imposed until the giving of the law on Sinai, when it then became the sign of the covenant (Exod 31:12-17). Even at the creation, however, God set an example which was to be followed.

“This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created.” This brings to a close one of the creation stories in Genesis but the sentence can also be read as the beginning of the next section. The word ‘account’ occurs ten times in Genesis, introducing each main section.

Reflecting on today’s reading we cannot be unaware that our responsibility to be stewards of God’s creation has frequently led to serious abuse of our environment at all levels and is a major concern today. We have mistaken stewardship for domination and control rather than good management. The whole of creation is put into our hands to supply our needs. But we realise more and more that we ourselves are part of that creation, that there is an essential symbiosis, a mutual interdependence.

From mighty galaxies to sub-atomic particles there is a seamless robe of being into which we must fit in a way that benefits all.

Mark 7:1-13

A group of self-righteous scribes and Pharisees come up from Jerusalem to observe Jesus. Obviously word has reached Jerusalem about what Jesus has been doing up in Galilee. They immediately notice that Jesus and his disciples do not observe some of the “traditions of the elders”, especially with regard to the washing of hands before eating. These traditions were a body of highly detailed but unwritten human laws which the Scribes and Pharisees regarded as having the same binding force as the Law of Moses. Paul admits to having been a fanatical upholder of these traditions (cf. Galatians 1:14)

It is hard not to come to the conclusion that many of these observances were originally based on practical experience. Eating without washing one’s hands could be a source of sickness, although they knew nothing about germs or bacteria. Because sometimes it could be diseased, eating pork made some people seriously sick so the meat was banned altogether. But in order to ensure these hygienic requirements would be observed they were linked to a religious sanction. Violating them was not just bad for your health, but a violation of God’s will. To ignore them was to disobey God.

Clearly Jesus was not against the washing of hands as such, even as a religious observance. What he was against was the legalism by which the mere observance of some external actions was equated with being a devout lover of God. He quotes from the prophet Isaiah (Is 29:13):

This people honours me only with lip service,
while their hearts are far from me.
The worship they offer me is worthless;
the doctrines they teach are only human regulations.

The real commandments of God, e. g. unconditional love of the neighbour, are neglected in favour of what are purely human traditions. Jesus illustrates the hypocrisy involved by showing how some supposedly devout people got around the basic responsibility of respect for parents (which the Mosaic law demanded) by claiming that they had consecrated all they owned to God and the temple, while in fact keeping it for their own use. The “Qorban” was a way of supposedly making a gift to God by an offering to the Temple but in such a way that the donor could continue to use it for himself and not give it to others, even needy parents. (Like the priest who said, “Each week I throw all the collection up in the air for God. What stays up, he keeps; the rest comes to me.”)

We sometimes meet Catholics who confuse the essential service of God with some religious rulings. They judge people by whether they eat fish on Friday or not. They piously go through all kinds of devotional exercises but their conversation is full of gossip and destructive criticism of others.

Others get tied down by scruples: Did I say my penance after Confession? When the more important question would be, Did I change my behaviour? How did I keep my promise not to repeat the same sins?

Or did I observe the full hour of fasting before communion? When the more important issue would be, ‘does my going to communion bring me closer to God and make me a more loving person with others?’

There can be a bit of the Pharisee in all of us and that is the real subject of the teaching today. We will only be judged by the depth of our love and nothing else.

Week 5 | Wednesday

Genesis 2:4-9,15-17; Mark 7:14-23

We have a very different creation story today. This section is chiefly concerned with the creation of Man, the human person. It is much older than the narrative from which we read yesterday (Gen 1:1-2:4). It comes from the Yahwistic source. It is not, as is sometimes said, a second creation narrative. Rather it focuses on the creation of Man as distinct from the creation of the world and is only complete with the separate creation of Woman and the appearance of the first human couple

Here God is depicted as creating Man before the rest of his creatures, which are made for Man’s sake. It is not realistic but this is not history, still less science. The meaning is to show the priority of Man in the order of things on this earth.

On the day on which the Lord made the earth and the heavens (the vault of the sky with its heavenly bodies), there was as yet no plant of any kind because no rain had yet begun to fall nor was there anyone to till the ground until a stream rose from the earth and covered the whole ground with water, on that very day the Lord God formed a man from the dust of the earth and then breathed into the nostrils of the inert body the breath of life so that the man became a living being (literally a living “soul”). The picture is of God working like a potter moulding the human body out of the clay of the earth. In the Hebrew there is a play on the words adam (‘man’) coming from adama (‘the ground’).

In this version of creation, humanity does not - as in yesterday’s reading - appear at the end of a long process of creation when all the lesser creatures were brought into being first, but comes into existence at the very beginning before anything else, even before the plants necessary for his survival.

Only then did the Lord God plant a garden in the east, in Eden. (Note: the garden is not Eden but in Eden). In this garden, he put the Man. In the garden also he placed every kind of plant that was pleasant to look at and providing fruit that was good to eat, as well as the “tree of life” (a symbol of the immortality which the Man was intended to enjoy) and the “tree of the knowledge of good and evil”.

The name “Eden” is used here as the name of a region in southern Mesopotamia (southern Iraq today) but does not actually correspond to any known site. The term comes from a Sumerian word eden, meaning “fertile plain”. A similar-sounding word in Hebrew means “delight” so Eden is understood as a “garden of delight”. Through the Greek translation of the Hebrew we get the word “Paradise” which literally means a “pleasure park”.

The man’s responsibility was to cultivate it and look after it. The man was also told that he was free to eat all and any of the plants in the garden (including, apparently, fruit from the “tree of life”).

The overall impression is that life was easy and exceedingly pleasant. But there was one special exception. He was not to eat the fruit from the “tree of the knowledge of good and evil”. Otherwise he would be doomed to death. Eating the fruit, as we shall see, did not bring about instant death. After eating the fruit, they survived but death would come as the end of a miserable existence of toil and sorrow. Sin, by separating us from God, can only lead to death.

The Man was master of his world but, with this one exception it was made clear that God was master of the Man and that this relationship would be acknowledged by the Man obeying this command of the Lord God.

The whole world is God’s gift to us but we need to remember that we have to enjoy it responsibly and not do it harm. Also we need always to conform our living to that vision of life that we have received from God through Jesus Christ and his Word. For us, Jesus and his Way is truly a tree of Life.”I have come that they may have life, life in abundance” (John 10:10).

Mark 7:14-23

After defending himself against the accusations of some Pharisees and scribes, about his not observing the traditions of the elders, Jesus now turns to the people. He enunciates what for him is the main principle:

- Nothing that goes into the body from outside can make a person ritually or religiously unclean.

- What makes a person unclean is the filth that comes from inside their mind and spoken through their mouth or expressed in action.

This was a major issue in the earliest days of the Church and was dealt with by the Council of Jerusalem. The story is told in the Acts of the Apostles. The first Christians were all Jews who continued to observe Jewish customs. But when non-Jews began to be accepted into the Christian communities, should they also be obliged to follow these laws and customs? It became clear that, from a religious point of view, no food could be called unclean. This helped to break down the barriers between Jew and Gentile. It has been pointed out that, immediately after this (cf. tomorrow’s reflection), Jesus entered Gentile territory, something he did not often do in his own ministry.

Even Jesus’ disciples seemed shocked by Jesus’ teaching (probably reflecting the reactions of some of the early Jewish Christians). Jesus repeats what he says in the light of the Kingdom he was proclaiming. No food that goes into a person from the outside can make a person unclean. Food does not go into the heart but into the stomach and ultimately passes out as waste. Real uncleanness is in the heart, in the mind. Real uncleanness comes from inside people in the form of “evil thoughts, unchastity, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, licentiousness, envy, blasphemy, arrogance, folly”. This is real uncleanness and the source is in ourselves and not in what we eat.

As Christians, we do not normally worry about clean and unclean foods on religious grounds but we can sometimes judge people’s religious commitment by their observance or non-observance purely external things – a nun not wearing a habit, not taking holy water on going into the church, taking communion in the hand/in the mouth.

We may have got rid of the problem of unclean foods but there are many other ways by which we focus on trivial externals while ignoring the real evils, the places where real love is absent – in ourselves.

Week 5 | Thursday

Genesis 2:18-25; Matt 7:24-30

We continue the story of the creation of Man.

The Man, here clearly understood as male, is still alone on the earth with only the plant life which had been given to him in the Garden.

So, now once more from the soil of the earth, God brings into being all the animals and birds. They are brought to the Man who gives names to them all, a sign that he is responsible for them and is over them. And the names they had were the names the Man gave them.

But the Man still needed “a helper as his partner”. The animals and birds could not fill that role. Without female companionship and a partner in reproduction, the Man could not fully realise his humanity and the command to increase and multiply.

The Man was put into a deep sleep and, as he slept, one of his ribs was removed and the gap covered with flesh. The rib, in its turn, was formed into a Woman and God then brought her to the Man.

On seeing her the Man is delighted and bursts into song:

This at last is bone from my bones and flesh from my flesh!

This one shall be called Woman, for out of Man this one was taken.

There is a play on the similar-sounding Hebrew words ishsha (“woman”) and ishah (“her man”).

And the writer then reflects that that this is the reason why in his own day “a man leaves his father and mother and clings to his wife, and they become one body”. Literally, “one flesh”. Classical Hebrew has no specific word for “body”. The sacred writer also stresses the fact that conjugal union is willed by God. We have here a beautiful image of marriage and one that has been experienced again and again. Often, it is only when the union is broken by the death of one partner that the closeness of the union is fully realised.

As a final comment, the writer says that, though naked, they felt no shame. This is a sign of their innocence. Nakedness is still a source of shame in our modern world. We are still uncomfortable with nudity. One by-product of this discomfort is pornography, watched in darkness or read in secret. And there is the exploitation of nudity, where people are reduced to being objects of sexual desire, or reduced to objects of contempt and ridicule (as happened to prisoners in Iraq). Yet, artists have been constantly enthralled by the beauty of the human body in its natural state and have created some of the most beautiful creations in painting and sculpture.

The story of the creation of Woman as “helpmate” to the Man also reminds us that perhaps the most ecstatic experience of human living is when a couple, passionately bonded body to body, express their love for each other in a way that cannot be surpassed. Where body, mind and spirit fuse in one perfect expression of union. Indeed it is not good for a man or a woman “to be alone”.

Mark 7:24-30

Having challenged some of the religious principles of Pharisees and Scribes, Jesus now pointedly goes into Gentile territory. The next three stories take place in non-Jewish areas. Why did Jesus go to the city of Tyre on the Mediterranean coast? It may have been to give him some breathing space from the crowds which pressed in on him everywhere. Later, he will move on to Sidon and then eastwards by way of the Sea of Galilee to the area known as Decapolis (Ten Towns). All of these places were dominated by Gentiles. Because the people there recognised his healing powers, he ministered to them also.

We are told that he entered a house in Tyre and did not want to be recognised. Why was this? Because his mission was only to his own people? Because people without faith only saw in Jesus a wonder worker? Nevertheless, he was already too well known even here to escape notice. His fame had spread even to these places.

It is then that a Gentile woman came to him. She was a Greek but Syro-phoenician by birth. She prostrated herself before Jesus and begged him to exorcise the evil spirit in her daughter. Jesus’ answer seems somewhat strange and out of character.”Let the children be fed first. For it is not right to take the food of the children and throw it to the dogs.” Jesus’ words suggest an image where the children of the family are fed first and then the leftovers are given to the dogs under the table. In so speaking, Jesus indicates the prior claim of the Jews to his ministry. In fact, we see this, too, in the missionary work of Paul. Whenever he arrived in a town for the first time, he always went to the Jewish synagogue first to preach the message of Christ and only later to the Gentiles. Because of the shared tradition of Jews and Christians they were the obvious people to hear the message first.

Jews (and also Muslims) avoided dogs as unclean animals. They were unclean because they ate all kinds of things indiscriminately. The name ‘dogs’ was sometimes applied by Jews to Gentiles and for the same reason. It is not unlikely that the woman was aware of this disparaging title. It is also important to sense the tone in which Jesus spoke and this is indicated by the reply of the woman. It is done in a mood of friendly banter. This is clear from the immediate response of the woman.”Lord (notice the title), even the dogs under the table eat the children’s scraps.” In other words, they do not wait until the children are finished eating. They eat simultaneously, even though they only get scraps.

Her powerful faith is immediately rewarded and her daughter is healed. It is a story anticipating the faith of future Gentiles who will become Christians. Let us pray that that faith may be ours also. We know that Jesus excludes absolutely no one from his mercy and healing power. Both as individuals and communities, may we too be as inclusive as possible in our relationships.

Week 5 | Friday

Genesis 3:1-8; Mark 7:31-37

A passage full of meaning as we hear about the Fall of the Man and the Woman.

Everything that God had made was very good, including the Man and the Woman. (They are not given here the names Adam and Eve which we find elsewhere. They are not, strictly speaking, specific individuals; they are Everyman and Everywoman, you and me.) They lived in perfect innocence and happiness, totally without shame or embarrassment in their pristine nakedness.

But now sin enters the picture. The source of evil is in the guise of a snake. It is described here as “more crafty than another wild animal that the Lord God had made”. Probably few people really like snakes. They are slimy and sinuous and slither along the ground; they have those beady eyes and those poisonous tongues. In fact, many of them are quite harmless and most have no interest in attacking humans.

Notice how the temptation works. The Tempter approaches the Woman. Is it because she is seen to be more vulnerable, more fickle, less reliable. (A male view!) It begins with an innocuous question which can easily be dealt with: “Is it true that God said you could not eat from any of the trees in the garden?”

“Oh no!” replies the Woman, “we can eat of any tree in the garden with just one exception. We may not touch the tree of the knowledge of good and evil on pain of death.”

”Oh come, come,” says the Tempter.”You will not die. On the contrary you will be like gods, knowing good and evil.” What the Tempter said was true but only partially so. They would not die physically if they ate the fruit but their relationship with God would die and they would eventually lose their immortality of life in the Garden.

And then they would indeed be able to distinguish good from evil because now, filled with guilt and shame, they would know what evil really was and how they had lost the original goodness with which they had been blessed.

However, the woman hears what she wants to hear. She takes a closer look at the forbidden tree and finds its fruit extremely attractive in addition to the desirability of getting that knowledge. (Incidentally, the fruit is not specified; no mention of apples!)

We might notice here that real temptation always comes under the guise of some good. No one chooses something which is totally evil or bad. Whether we beat up someone, have sex, or steal, or put down another person - there is always some apparent good attracting us.”Revenge”, for instance, “is sweet.” But it can also be very wrong.”Sex is fantastic fun” but it can be highly degrading of both parties.

The woman clearly understood that it was wrong to pick the fruit but she was persuaded by the good things the tempter had pointed out to her. They outweighed the commandment of God. The woman then made her decision, picked some of the fruit and ate it. She also offered some to her husband and he, equally aware of what God had said, ate some.

(Nevertheless, in this patriarchal account, there is an implication that the Man’s guilt is somewhat less. He might never have been tempted if it had not been for the Woman. It is the seduction of woman that is man’s downfall. However, because the Man is the real source of life, it is he, more than the Woman, who passes on the fruit of his sin to his descendants.)

Then, what the tempter had said became true: their eyes were opened and they realised they were naked. In other words, they became aware of the wrong they had done and were filled with guilt and shame.

So they hastily tried to cover their shame by covering their sexual organs with fig leaves sewn together.

Perhaps this is also a way of explaining the origin of our sensitivity about that part of our body. It is something which is very much a feature of the Old Testament and has been picked up by both Christians and Muslims, who, in some cultures, keep women covered from head to toe. But we also know that, in some warmer climates, there are people who go around without any clothes and are perfectly comfortable about it. The titillation of Playboy would be quite incomprehensible to them.

But their shame went further. As God came walking in the garden in the cool of the evening (what a lovely image!), the Man and Woman did not dare to face him. They hid. Yes, their eyes had been opened but not in the way they expected. The “cool of the evening” is literally “the wind of the day”. On most days in Palestine a cooling breeze blows from the sea shortly before sunset.

Yes, the ways of the tempter are very subtle indeed and we get caught again and again. This subject has been treated with both humour and insight by C S Lewis in The Screwtape Letters.

Mark 7:31-37

Jesus is still in Gentile territory. He has now moved east from the Mediterranean coast to the interior on the east side of the Sea of Galilee in the area of the Decapolis (Greek for “Ten Towns”).

A deaf and dumb man is brought to Jesus for healing. He takes the man aside, puts his fingers in the man’s ears, touches his tongue with spittle, looks up to heaven and prays, “Be opened”. Immediately the man’s ears are opened, his tongue loosed and he is able speak plainly. As often happens in this gospel, the people who witnessed the miracle are told not to say anything about it to anyone “but the more Jesus insisted, the more widely they published it”.

Their admiration was unbounded.”He has done all things well,” they said, “he makes the deaf hear and the dumb speak.”

As often happens in the Gospel and especially in Mark we have here much more than a miracle story, the healing of a physical ailment. We are approaching a climactic part of this gospel and this passage leads into it. What Jesus does to this man is something that is meant to happen to every one of his followers, including his immediate disciples.

We all need to have our ears opened so that we can hear and understand in its fullness the message of Jesus. In addition to that, once we have heard and understood, the natural

consequence is that we go out and speak openly to the world about what we have heard and understood. Both hearing and speaking are inseparable for the Christian disciple.

And so in the older form of the baptismal rite and it still may be used in the current liturgy, the celebrant may touch the ears of the one being baptised and put saliva on the lips. (Saliva was believed to have healing powers. And in this the ancients were right; it is in fact a kind of antibiotic. It is why animals also lick their wounds.) This rite symbolises the grace of the sacrament by which the newly baptised (I speak of an adult) hears and accepts the Word of God and undertakes the responsibility of proclaiming it in word and action.

And, as in today’s story, when we have truly experienced the power of that message and the love of God in our own lives, we cannot but do what that man did – broadcast it far and wide.

Week 5 | Saturday

Genesis 3:9-24; Mark 8:1-10

The man and the woman now experience the results of their disobedience to God.

It begins with a lovely but sad dialogue between God and the man and the woman. God is looking for them in the Garden.”Where are you?” God, of course, knows where they are but he needs to elicit the confession of their sin. The man says they are hiding because they are naked. Nakedness now fills them with a sense of shame and guilt. They can no longer face their God. Their original innocence is gone; from now on nakedness is linked to immorality and base desires.

“Who told you that you were naked?” God asks the Man, “Have you been eating of the tree you were not supposed to eat from?” God now interrogates the Man, who blames the Woman, who blames the serpent. God’s judgements, however, are pronounced in the reverse order. What follows provides explanations for the origin of some present-day realities - agriculture, prepared or cooked food, childbearing, family of husband and wife.

We see a pathetic shifting of responsibility to someone else. First, the Man blames the woman, the “woman you put with me” - even God is being held partly to blame! “Yes, I ate the fruit but she made me do it.” She, in her turn, blames the serpent for putting temptation in her way.”He tricked me.” The Hebrew for this verb, hiss’iani, suggests the hissing of the snake.

All now pay the price of their wrongdoing.

First the serpent. He is condemned to crawl the earth for ever eating the earth with a hint that in the original creation the snake was once upright. He will be cursed for ever among all the animals. From now on, a strange enmity will exist between the woman and the serpent, between her offspring and the serpent’s.”He will strike your head and you will strike his heel.”

Later theology would see here not just enmity between snakes and humans but the serpent is identified with Satan, whose eventual defeat seems implied in the contrast between ‘head’ and ‘heel’. Later generations saw in the passage the first promise of a Redeemer for sinful humanity. In that case, the Woman’s offspring is Jesus Christ.

The New Jerusalem Bible has the following comment:

The Hebrew text, by proclaiming that the offspring of the snake is henceforth at enmity with the woman’s descendants, opposes the human race to the devil and his ‘seed’, his posterity, and hints at ultimate victory. It is the first glimmer of salvation, the proto-evangelium or ‘pre-Gospel’.

The Greek version has a masculine pronoun (‘he’, not ‘it’ will bruise. . .), thus ascribing the victory not to the woman’s descendants in general but to one Son in particular, and thus providing the basis for the messianic interpretation given by many of the Fathers. The Latin version has a feminine pronoun (‘she’ will bruise. . .) and since in the messianic interpretation of our text, the Messiah and his Mother appear together, the pronoun has been taken to refer to Mary. (edited)

The woman: She will experience great pain when giving birth. She will have a strong desire for her husband but will be dominated by him. Women’s historical subordination to the male is presented as a consequence of human events, not an ideal in its own right. Responsibilities of procreation will compromise the freedom of both genders. He will dominate her but he will need her to continue his family line.

The man: In the garden the Man had just to pick the fruit from the trees. Now the tilling of the unfriendly and infertile soil will become a laborious and painful task, resulting often in brambles and thistles. From now on his life will be one of hard physical labour until the day he goes back to the soil from which he was originally made. Agriculture was a major step in human evolution but one beset with difficulty and hard work. Unlike the abundant fruit just waiting to be picked, bread, for instance, requires many steps and much human cooperation in its preparation. And, at the end, he will return to the earth from which he came - the first clear indication of human mortality.

In a final touch, we are told that God made skins for the Man and his wife to wear to cover the shame of their nakedness. Some see in this a new alienation between humans and animals, which did not exist in the Garden. Animals now were being killed by humans for food, clothing and other purposes - and humans were often being killed and eaten by animals. Later, the prophet would dream of a day when the lion and the lamb could lie down peacefully together - Paradise Regained.

At the same time the Man and the Woman were now able, like God, “to know good and evil”. They now knew all the possible extremes, they knew about sex, mortality and moral distinctions of good and bad, right and wrong. There was a danger that they could reach out to the Tree of Life and win immortality. They must be removed from the Garden and sent back to the earth from which they had originally come. They will have to settle for the modified immortality of succeeding family generations - a human family tree.

To the east of the Garden in Eden, cherubim with a flaming sword were placed to keep the Man and the Woman out and away from the Tree of Life.

Lastly, the Man now gave his wife the name of Eve, which means “bearer of life”. She would be the mother of every person to be born in succeeding ages. This second naming of Woman reflects the couple’s new role as procreators. Much later, spiritual writers liked to take the Latin form of her name ‘Eva’ and turn it round to read ‘Ave’, the word of greeting used by the angel at the Annunciation to Mary, our new Mother.

Obviously, all of this is less a historical account than an explanation why things are the way they are. It is part of the answer to the question we raised earlier: If everything God created was so good, why is there so much pain and suffering in the world? Human pain and sorrows are not intended by God. Evil is the result of our own misbehaviour.

Again, the New Jerusalem Bible comments:

The punishment is appropriate to the specific functions of each: the woman suffers as mother and wife, the man as bread-winner. The text does not imply that, without sin, woman would have given birth painlessly or that man would not have had to work with sweat on his brow, any more than that, before sin, snakes had feet [i. e. did not have to crawl on their bellies].

Sin upsets the order willed by God: woman, instead of being man’s associate and equal, becomes his seductress, while he for his part reduces her to the role of child-bearer; man, instead of being God’s gardener in Eden, has to struggle against a now hostile environment. But the greatest punishment is the loss of intimacy with God. These penalties are hereditary. The doctrine of hereditary guilt is not clearly stated until Paul draws his comparison between the solidarity of all in the Saviour Christ and the solidarity of all in sinful Adam, Rom 5.

This is the “original sin”.

We should avoid a fundamentalist, literal understanding of all this, as if we were dealing with ‘real’ history. What is being said is that the human race, as far back as we can go, has been infected with sinful acts against truth, love and justice and, in consequence of its own choices, has suffered hardships of all kinds.

Mark 8:1-10

Today we have the second of two multiplication stories found in Mark. The first with 5,000 people was in a predominantly Jewish area while this one with 4,000 people is in mainly Gentile territory. Jesus is reaching out to both groups. The people have nothing to eat and are hungry. The meaning is both physical and spiritual.

Once again we see Mark indicating the emotional response of Jesus. He is filled with compassion for the people in their need.”I feel compassion for all these people… If I send them off home hungry they will collapse on the way… Some have come a great distance.”

They will collapse “on the way”, on the road. Jesus is the Way, the Road. To walk the road of Jesus, we need a certain kind of nourishment. This is what Jesus came to give.

The disciples, interpreting Jesus literally, as they usually do, ask: “Where could anyone get bread to feed these people in a deserted place like this?” In the presence of Jesus, the question answers itself but the disciples have not yet clicked. In Mark’s gospel they are often shown to be without an understanding of just who their Master is. That is because they represent us.

The disciples are asked what they can supply. Seven loaves and a few fish is all they have.

There is a strong eucharistic element in this, as in the former story. The people are told to sit down.”He took the seven loaves, and after giving thanks (eucharistesas in the Greek), he broke them and handed them to his disciples to distribute. And they distributed them among the crowd.”

Again we note that Jesus himself does not give out the food the people need. It comes from him but his distributed by his disciples. The same is today. It is our task to feed the hungry – both physically and spiritually. All were filled – 4,000 people altogether – and even so there were seven (a perfect number) baskets left over. A sign of God’s abundance shared with his people.

Again, as before, “He sent them away and, immediately, getting into the boat with his disciples, went to the region of Dalmanutha”, back to Jewish territory. Jesus was leaving no room for any misinterpretations of what he had done. The disciples too are quickly removed from the scene. There was to be no self-congratulation or glorying in their connections with Jesus the wonder worker. Through the miracle the teaching had been given and that was it.

Lord, teach me to serve you as you deserve;
to give and not to count the cost;
to fight and not to heed the wounds;
to labour and seek no reward
save that of knowing that I do your holy will.

Week 6 | Monday

Genesis 4:1-15,25

The story of original sin continues with a number of accounts all pointing to the source of people’s pain and suffering - their alienation from the ways of God. Today it is about the all-too prevalent violence and killing which brings death, anger, fear and division into people’s lives.

The New Jerusalem Bible introduces the story in this way:

This narrative presupposes a developed civilisation, an established form of worship, the existence of other people who might kill Cain, the existence of a clan that would rally to him. It may be that the narrative originally referred not to the children of the first Man but to the eponymous ancestor of the Cainites (see Num 24:21). The Yahwistic tradition has moved the story back to the period of the beginning, thus giving it a universal significance: after the revolt against God we now have fratricidal strife; against these two evils is directed the double command that sums up the whole Law - the love of God and of neighbour. Matt 22:40.

Now expelled from the Garden, the Man has sexual relations with his wife, Eve, and they have a son who is called Cain.”I have produced a man with the help of the Lord.” The Hebrew name qayin (“Cain”) and the term qaniti (“I have produced”) present a play on words. There are many examples where biblical naming of children or places typically involves puns on key events. The statement also expresses the delight of the first Woman who, though under the domination of her husband, produces what the Man wants but cannot produce on his own - a son. God is more behind the procreation of the son than her husband.

Cain, then, is seen as a gift from God. There is an element of creation in every act of pro-creation. Cain is soon followed by a brother, Abel. ‘Abel’, in Hebrew folk etymology “Emptiness, Futility”, is the perfect counterpart of “Acquisition”. In the Scriptures brother pairs are often seen opposed in temperament, way of life and destiny (e. g. Jacob and Esau).

Abel was a shepherd while Cain was a farmer tilling the ground. The historical opposition of shepherds and farmers is indicated here. God favours the shepherd, but the choice comes to grief in any case. This is the first instance, too, of a common biblical theme - the younger being preferred to the elder (among others, Isaac to Ishmael, Jacob to Esau, Rachel to Leah). Such preferences indicate the freedom of God’s choice, his bypassing earthly standards of greatness and his regard for the lowly. (See Jesus’ teaching to his disciples about who is really great in the Kingdom.)

In the course of time, Cain brought along the fruits of his farming and offered them to the Lord. Abel also brought the first lambs of his flock and offered their fat portions to the Lord. God was pleased with the offerings of Abel but disregarded those of Cain. This made Cain very angry and resentful. We might be inclined to sympathise or ask the reason for the discrimination.

Perhaps Cain is being told that what really pleases God is righteousness and good behaviour. This will emerge more clearly in the time of the prophets where religious rituals are seen only as having value when they are accompanied by a life of concern for the brother and sister, especially those in need.

God asks Cain why he is angry and despondent. If he had done well, would he not have been accepted by God? If he is badly disposed to God’s treatment of him, is not sin lurking at his door “like a crouching beast hungering for you”? This is something he must overcome but something he failed to do. He invited his brother to go out to his farm and there Cain killed Abel. The crime is aggravated by the deceit (“Let us go into the field”), its being against a blood brother and a good man, who had done nothing to provoke such violence.

God then asks Cain where his brother has gone. As in the case of the Man and the Woman after their sin, God knows very well what has happened but he wants to give Cain an opportunity to confess his crime. However, Cain backs off. He says he does not know and then asks the famous question: “Am I my brother’s keeper?” It is, of course, in the Scriptures a rhetorical question.

God now comes out straight: “What have you done? Your brother’s blood is crying out to me from the earth.” So Cain is cursed from the ground, the very ground which received Abel’s blood from Cain’s hand. From now on, the earth he tills will not be productive while Cain himself will be a fugitive and a wanderer over the earth. He will enjoy no citizens’ rights, at least in his initial homeland.

Cain’s punishment is to till the ground with great difficulty and to be condemned to the life of an ever-wandering nomad. This was, in fact, the life of many people in pre-agricultural days and there are still people living in this way, including the Bedouins of the desert.

Cain feels his punishment is more than he can bear: he has been driven from the soil which provided him with a living and, worse, he must remain hidden from the face of God, while being a fugitive and wanderer for the rest of his life. Anyone who sees him will feel justified in killing him. Faced with his crime, Cain does not express any form of repentance but is simply filled with self-pity. Ironically, then, he begs God that he not meet the same fate as his own brother, that of being killed.

He has no need to fear, God tells him, because anyone who kills Cain will be punished seven times more severely. The message is clear: killing, even in revenge is ruled out (cf. Jesus’ words on this in Matt 5:21-26). God then put a mark on Cain to prevent anyone from striking him down. This is not a brand of shame but a protecting sign: it shows that Cain (with Abel) belongs to a clan which will exact blood for blood. The use of tattooing for tribal marks has always been common among the nomads of the Near Eastern deserts. Also in ancient times, certain criminals were offered limited asylum when uncontrolled reprisals posed a greater social danger than the criminals themselves.

Cain was left in a living hell - neither living nor dying. But what he did was only the beginning of a huge trail of murder and bloodshed in the world’s history. For the authors of Genesis this was the first recorded murder but such violence continues now as a reality of life, part of man’s sinfulness from the very beginning. In a verse which is part of this story but not contained in our reading, Lamech, a descendant of Adam boasts of killing a man for wounding him and a young man for striking him.”If Cain is avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy-sevenfold.” (Is Jesus’ answer to Peter about the number of times he should forgive an echo of Lamech’s boast? Cf. Matt 18:22)

At the end of the reading, we are told that later Adam again had intercourse with his wife and they bore a son called Seth.”God has granted me another child instead of Abel.” The Hebrew word for ‘granted’ (shat) sounds very like ‘Seth’. Abel was dead and Cain was rejected so another son was needed for the family line (indeed the human line) to continue. We know very little about Seth except that - in biblical terms - he lived a very long life and had many descendants (Gen 5:6-7).

We live today in a world full of violence and killing. Let us not be instigators of violence in any way - in action, in word or even in thought.

Mark 8:11-13

The Pharisees, disturbed by what Jesus is saying and doing, demand some ‘heavenly’ sign to indicate that his authority comes from God. He refuses to acquiesce to their request. They will not get a sign on their terms.

The irony, of course, is that Jesus’ whole life is a sign, a sign of God’s loving presence among us. In Mark, the ordinary people can see this clearly. Only the leaders and - in Mark - Jesus’ own disciples are slow to learn.

In the immediately foregoing passage Jesus has just fed 4,000 people with seven loaves of bread and a few fish. The signs are there in abundance but the Pharisees cannot see because they do not want to see. Their blindness is a central theme to this part of Mark, as we shall see.

We too need to be aware of our own blindness and our failure to see the ‘signs’ of God’s love operating in our everyday lives.

Week 6 | Tuesday

Genesis 6:5-8, 7:1-5,10

Is there some deep memory behind this story and then reading into it a religious meaning? What was the cause of the Flood? Or was it pure myth? Was it some overflowing of the rivers going through what is now Iraq? Was it the result of a tsunami caused by a mighty earthquake in the Mediterranean? In any case, it is another “Fall” story like that of Adam and Eve.

The New American Bible introduces the story in this way:

The story of the great flood is a composite narrative based on two separate sources interwoven into an intricate patchwork. To the “Yahwist” source, with some later editorial additions, are usually assigned 6:5-8; 7:1-5,7-10,12,16b,17b,22-23; 8:2b-3a,6-12,13b,20-22. The other sections come from the “Priestly document”. The combination of the two sources produced certain duplications; also certain inconsistencies, such as the number of the various animals taken into the ark and the timetable of the flood. Both biblical sources go back ultimately to an ancient Mesopotamian story of a great flood, preserved in the eleventh tablet of the Gilgamesh Epic. The latter account, in some respects remarkably similar to the biblical account, is in others very different from it. [NB edited version]

The New Jerusalem Bible also comments:

There are several Babylonian stories of the Flood which are in some respects remarkably similar to the biblical narrative. This last does not derive from them but draws on the same source, namely, on the memory of one or more disastrous floods in the valley of the Euphrates and Tigris which tradition had enlarged to the dimensions of a worldwide catastrophe. But there is this fundamental difference: the author has used this tradition as a vehicle for teaching eternal truths - that God is just and merciful, that human beings are perverse, that God saves his faithful ones (see Heb 11:7). The Flood is a divine judgement which foreshadows that of the latter days (Matt 24:37ff; Luke 17:26ff), just as Noah’s salvation prefigures the saving waters of baptism (cf. 1 Pet 3:20-21).

The setting is that mankind has become steeped in sin and immorality. As the reading opens, we are told that God saw how great was the wickedness of mankind on the earth.”Every inclination of the thoughts of their hearts was only evil continually.” There was moral corruption everywhere. (And, because human nature did not change after the Flood, the situation did not greatly improve.) At this time, too, there is as yet no distinction between Israel and everyone else.

God, described in very human terms, regrets not only the creation of human beings but of all the “animals, creeping things and birds of the air” as well. Though morally innocent, the animal world, as creatures under human corrupted rule, shared in being judged. The heavenly bodies and the plants were excluded (because they would not have been wiped out by a flood).

Saying that God ‘regrets’ is a human way of expressing the fact that tolerance of sin is totally incompatible with his sanctity (1 Sam 15:29 reminds us that God, unlike humanity, never has to repent). In a far greater number of passages the expression means that God’s anger has been appeased and his threat withdrawn as soon as his people change their ways (cf. Jer 26:3).

There is one human exception to the universal corruption. Noah was a good man, who “had found favour with the Lord”. The destruction to come will, through him, become a reconstruction. Noah and his family will become a righteous remnant which will survive and regenerate, paving the way for the appearance of God’s people in the person of Abraham.

We need to note that much of the full story is left out in our readings.

Before the rains come, Noah and all his family are to go aboard the ark. The actual building of the ark according to instructions given by God is omitted in our reading. The English word ‘ark’ comes from the Latin translation arca, meaning a ‘box’ or a ‘chest’.

Noah is told to bring with him and his family seven each (male and female) of clean animals and two each of the unclean and seven each of birds. (For an explanation of the number ‘seven’, see tomorrow’s reading.) The ceremonially unclean animals would only have to reproduce themselves after the Flood, but greater numbers of ceremonially clean animals would be needed also for the burnt offerings that Noah would sacrifice and for food. One might have thought that God would have got rid of all the “unclean” animals altogether but their continuing presence after the flood had to be accounted for.

We need to remember that we are not dealing here with a historical event but with a myth. Myths play a very important role in human life and culture. A myth is basically a story which expresses a deep truth that cannot really be expressed in any other way. It is a way, too, of presenting deep truths to people who are uneducated and illiterate (but by no means unintelligent). Much of the Old Testament takes the form of myth but we should not be concerned about this. In fact, it is this realisation that opens up to us the full meaning of passages. Fundamentalism and literalism have the opposite effect.

Seven days after they went aboard, God said he would send rain on the earth for 40 days and 40 nights and every living thing on the earth would be wiped out. This period of time is often used to indicate a significant period in salvation history (cf. Deut 9:11; Matt 4:1-11, the temptation of Jesus in the desert).

Noah did everything that God had told him to do. Seven days later the rains began.

The message is clear: God protects the virtuous and punishes the wicked. However, we might modify our way of saying that now. Based on many other passages both in the Old and New Testaments, it is difficult for us to accept a God who takes vengeance on those who go against the way of life he proposes to us. It contradicts the teaching that Jesus, the Son of God, gave us, especially in his sacrificial death for us sinners. As Paul tells us, it is easy to understand a person dying for a good person but not for a wicked one. That is exactly what Jesus, with the full approval of his Father, did for us.

There is indeed punishment for sin but it flows out of the sinful acts themselves. Evil is destructive; good is nurturing and growth-inducing. Evil brings division; goodness brings peace and harmony.

Mark 8:14-21

Yesterday we saw the blindness of the Pharisees in asking Jesus to give some sign of his authority from God. Today we see the blindness of Jesus’ own disciples. This, of course, is pointing to our blindness in not recognising the clear presence of God in our own lives.

The disciples are travelling across the lake in the boat. They had forgotten to bring food with them and there was only one loaf between them all. As they cross the lake, Jesus is talking to them.”Keep your eyes open; be on your guard against the yeast of the Pharisees and the yeast of Herod.” For the Jews yeast was a corrupting agent because it caused fermentation. That was why at the Pasch they ate unleavened, incorrupt, bread. And Paul tells the Corinthians: “Get rid of all the old yeast, and make yourselves into a completely new batch of bread, unleavened as you are meant to be” (1 Cor 5:7).

Jesus is telling his disciples to avoid two opposing kinds of corruption. That of the Pharisees which is based on narrow-minded and intolerant legalism and that of Herod, which is based on amoral and hedonistic pleasure-seeking.

However, the disciples are not really listening to their Master. They latch on to the word “yeast” and link it with their present obsession - not enough bread. Their lunch is the only thing on their minds. Jesus, of course, knows what is going in their minds.

He scolds them: “You are worried about having no bread? Do you not understand? Have you no perception? Are your minds closed? Have you eyes that do not see, ears that do not hear? Do you not remember? When I broke the five loaves among the 5,000, how many baskets of leftovers did you pick up?” “Twelve,” they answer.”And when I broke the seven loaves for the 4,000, how many baskets of leftovers did you collect?” “Seven.” “And you still do not understand?”

Five loaves for 5,000 with 12 baskets over, seven loaves for 4,000 with seven baskets over, and they, a mere dozen people, are worried about being short of food when Jesus is with them?

Mark tends to be very hard on the disciples. They cannot see, they cannot hear, they fail to understand what is happening before their very eyes. But they are learning gradually, as we shall see. Of course, Mark is firing his shots not at the disciples but at you and me. How much faith have we got in God’s care for us? Can we hear, can we see? Are we also without understanding?

Week 6 | Wednesday

Genesis 8:6-13,20-22

We read today of the end of the Flood as the rain stops and the waters recede. In the meantime, every living thing on land was totally wiped out. (All the underwater creatures, of course, survived and perhaps even throve in the flood conditions! There was so much dead carrion available. But in myth stories one does not quibble about such details. What matters is the central meaning of the story.)

After the 40 days, God remembered Noah and his family and all the living things that were with him in the ark. Then, a drying wind blew, the outlets for water in the earth and the “windows” in the vault of the heavens through which rain came were closed and the waters began to recede. But it was not until seven months and 17 days later that the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat, in present-day Turkey, and it was only in the 10th month that the tops of the mountains began to appear.

And it was not until 40 days after that (in other words, they were in the ark for the best part of a year) that Noah sent out a raven. It flew back and forth until eventually the waters had dried up from the earth. Then it never came back, presumably because it feasted on the dead bodies it found everywhere. It could represent one of the unclean animals on board.

Then a dove (probably regarded a clean animal - and a vegetarian!) was sent out but, when the dove could not find any place to land, it returned to the ark. After another seven days the dove was sent out again and this time it returned with a freshly plucked olive leaf in its beak - a clear sign that the waters had receded a good deal. Olive trees do not grow at high altitudes. The dove with the olive branch has ever since become the universal sign of peace and flourishing life.

After another seven days the dove was sent out again and this time it did not return. It had found a place to stay. Noah knew that he, his family and all the animals could now safely leave the ark. He opened the entrance hatch of the ark, looked out and saw that the face of the earth was drying up again. It was only when it was completely dry that he gave the order to leave the ark.

After they had all disembarked, Noah built an altar and offered burnt offerings (a holocaust) from each of the clean animals that had been in the ark. (This could be done because, we remember, seven pairs of each kind of clean animal had been taken into the ark.) This was in thanksgiving to God for their being saved. God was pleased with the “fragrant odour” of this sacrifice and pledged never to curse the earth again because of the sins of humanity nor would he destroy all living creatures again, although individuals might be punished. Because “the inclination of the human heart is evil from the earliest years”. The heart is the centre of all religious awareness and morality - the source of both virtue and sin. And the tendency to sin did not lessen after the Flood.

The reading ends with a verse which seems to have been a popular proverb or saying:

As long as earth lasts, sowing and reaping, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night, shall cease no more.

In other words, as long as our world endures, the rhythm of nature and of the seasons will never be disrupted in this way again.

In fact, of course, over the centuries, this pledge has been kept although from time to time there have been massive calamities which have brought death and destruction and often changed the face of a particular region forever. Our main concern nowadays is not from natural calamities which, ironically, can sometimes also bring benefits in the long term, but the disasters which may arise from our misuse and abuse of the earth’s resources and the danger of irreversible damage to the delicate balance of nature. Each one of us can play a positive role in reversing this trend.

Mark 8:22-26

We are approaching a high point in Mark’s gospel. And it is preceded by today’s strategically placed story. At first glance it looks like a simple healing story of a blind man but, as in most of Mark’s miracles, there is a deep symbolic meaning inside.

People bring a blind man to Jesus so that Jesus could apply his healing touch. (How much of our touching is healing? Or are we afraid of physical touch?) Jesus takes the man aside away from the crowds. He puts spittle on the man’s eyes and asks, “”Can you see anything?” The man, who is beginning now to see, says he can see people, but they are like trees and walking about. Jesus lays his hands on the man’s eyes again and now he can see clearly.”He could see everything plainly and distinctly.” Jesus tells him to go directly home, not through the village. He wants no misplaced sensationalism about who he is. The truth of that is going to be revealed very soon.

The story is clearly linked with other events that have just been taking place. We have seen the blindness of the Pharisees unable to recognise the power of God in the words and works of Jesus. We can see the blindness of his own disciples when he asked them in the boat: “Can you not see? Can you not hear? Do you not understand?”

This story, coming where it is, is a parable about the gradual opening of the disciples’ eyes as it begins to dawn on them just who Jesus is. We will see in tomorrow’s gospel a giant step in their seeing and understanding while at the same time being aware that they still have a long way to go.

Our understanding of Jesus is also a gradual process and it never ends. Many seem to settle into a complacent level of understanding beyond which they never go. As a result their spiritual growth is blocked and also their ability to have a growing faith enrich their lives.

Week 6 | Thursday

Genesis 9:1-13

After the flood God extends his blessings over Noah and his family and over all the animals that have survived.

Furthermore, the mandate given to the man in the garden is repeated. The family of Noah, effectively the ancestors of all humanity, are to be fruitful and multiply. In addition Noah and his descendants are given responsibility and lordship over every living thing - on the earth, in the air, in the water.

In the Garden Man had been blessed and was consecrated lord of creation; he is now blessed and consecrated anew. All creatures are now at his disposal. Now, not only are plants given as food (as was the case in the Garden) but the other creatures, too, like animals, may be taken as food, used for doing heavy work (e. g. ploughing) and for their skins (e. g. to make tents and clothes). In the Garden, where all needs were readily available there was no need to work nor, in their innocence, to wear clothes. Humans and animals alike were plant-eaters only. Now the animal can become the victim of Man’s needs.

And, with the eating of animals, a new element is introduced with the prohibition to eat meat in which blood, the source of life, has not been already removed. Israelite law also forbade eating animal flesh torn in the field by other animals. (Here, there is a reading back into pre-history of regulations that only were legislated for later on.)

Furthermore there is to be absolute respect for human life, no spilling of human blood, for every human person is in the image of God. Animals, too, were to be punished if they caused the death of a human person. According to the Mosaic law, a domestic animal that had taken human life was to be stoned to death.

Because a living being dies when it loses most of its blood, the ancients regarded blood as the seat of life, and therefore as sacred. Although in itself the prohibition against eating meat with blood in it is comparable to the ritual laws of the Mosaic code, the Jews considered it binding on everyone, because it was given by God to Noah, the new ancestor of all mankind. And so the early Christian Church retained this restriction for a time (Acts 15:20,29).

God himself is the great defender of human life, which is precious to him because Man was created in his image and because Man is the earthly representative and focal point of God’s kingdom.

God then makes his first covenant with mankind to last forever, a covenant which includes every living thing that was with Noah in the ark.”No thing of flesh shall be swept away again by the waters of the flood. There shall be no flood to destroy the earth again.”

The sign of that covenant is a rainbow crossing the skies. Rain and the rainbow doubtless existed long before the time of Noah’s flood but after the flood the rainbow took on new meaning as the sign of the covenant with Noah. Every time it appeared it was a reminder of the covenant. Rainbows too are the sign of sunshine after rain.

The covenant with Noah, the sign of which is the rainbow, involves the whole of creation. Later covenants will be more specific. The covenant with Abraham, the sign of which is circumcision, was to be limited to his descendants only (Gen 17). The covenant with Moses was to be confined to Israel alone and entailed corresponding obligations: fidelity to the Law and to Sabbath observance in particular. (For list of covenants, cf. NIV Study Bible, page 21).

For us, of course, the final covenant is the New Testament between God and the world signed in the blood of Jesus on the Cross and celebrated in every Eucharist. But each one of us can and does dishonour this Covenant every time we violate the Way that Jesus has shown us. This New Covenant is renewed every time we celebrate the Eucharist together but the keeping of this covenant depends on how we live our daily lives in our relationship with God, with those around us and with ourselves.

Mark 8:27-33

We now come to a high point in Mark’s gospel which the texts of previous days have been leading up to. Since the beginning of this gospel the question has been continually asked: “Who is Jesus?” Today we get the answer. The blind and deaf disciples show that they are beginning to see more clearly.

So Jesus himself puts the question that has been underlying all that has gone before: “Who do people say I am?” The disciples give a number of answers reflecting the speculations of the people. These include:

- John the Baptist come to life again

- Elijah, who was expected to return to earth just before the arrival of the Messiah

- One of the other prophets…

Then Jesus asks his disciples what they believe.”Who do you say I am?” Peter speaks up in the name of all: “You are the Christ.”

This is indeed a dramatic moment. Jesus is not just an ordinary rabbi, not just a prophet. He is the long-awaited Christ, the Messiah, the anointed King of Israel. This is a tremendous breakthrough for the disciples. However, they are told to keep this to themselves for the time being. There were many expectations about the Messiah and Jesus did not want to be identified with them.

But it is not the end of the story. There is a sudden and unexpected twist for which they were not at all prepared. Jesus immediately begins to tell them what is going to happen to him in the days ahead: that he will suffer grievously, be rejected by the religious leaders of his own people, be put to death and - perhaps most surprising of all - after three days rise again. And there was no mistaking his meaning for “he said all this quite openly”. ‘Religious leaders’ here refers to the Sanhedrin, the 71-member ruling council of the Jews consisting of elders, the chief priests and the scribes. Under Roman rule, it had authority in religious matters.

For the first time in this gospel Jesus refers to himself as the “Son of Man”. He will do this many more times. The title was first used in the book of Daniel (7:13-14) as a symbol of “the saints of the Most High”, referring to those faithful Israelites who receive the everlasting kingdom from the “Ancient One” (God). In the apocryphal books of 1 Enoch and 4 Ezra the title does not refer to a group but to a unique figure of extraordinary spiritual endowments, who will be revealed as the one through whom the everlasting kingdom decreed by God will be established. Of itself, this expression means simply a human being, or, indefinitely, someone, and there are evidences of this use in pre-Christian times. Its use in the New Testament is probably due to Jesus’ speaking of himself in that way, “a human being”, and the later Church’s taking this in the sense of the Jewish apocrypha and applying it to him with that meaning (cf. New American Bible)

It is not difficult to imagine how the disciples must have been profoundly shocked and could not believe their ears at what Jesus was telling them. Peter, their impetuous leader, immediately begins to protest. They have just pronounced Jesus to be the long-awaited leader of the Jewish people and now he says he is going to be rejected and executed by their very own leaders. It made absolutely no sense whatever. Jesus turns round, looks at his disciples and scolds Peter with the terrible words, “Get behind me, Satan! Because the way you think is not God’s way but man’s.”

This is what the gradual opening of the eyes of the blind man in yesterday’s story indicated. They had reached the stage where they had made the exciting discovery that their Master was none other than the long-awaited Messiah. They had answered the first question of Mark’s gospel: Who is Jesus? But they were still immersed in all the traditional expectations that had grown up around the coming of the Messiah, as the victorious and triumphing king who would put all Israel’s enemies to flight.

But they would have to unlearn all this. The rest of Mark will answer the second question: What kind of Messiah is Jesus? or What does it mean for Jesus to be Messiah?

And a further question follows from that. What will all that mean for the disciples - and for us? We will see some of that tomorrow.

Week 6 | Friday

Genesis 11:1-9

Today we come to the end of our selected readings from the account of Creation and our tragic fall from the life that God originally intended for us, the “original blessing” described by the writer Matthew Fox.

Today’s story is based on the temple towers called ‘ziggurats’ in ancient Babylon, a city with few happy memories for the Israelites and, for them, the home of idolatry and religious corruption. The context is used by the writer to show humanity’s increasing wickedness, here shown by an arrogant desire to create an urban culture without God. A secondary theme is an explanation of the huge diversity of languages and dialects in people who, in most respects, seem so similar and also an explanation for the meaning of the name ‘Babylon’.

Like the garden of Eden story, it is a folktale of human pride and folly and reflecting Israel’s strong anti-urban bias.

We are told that originally the whole of humanity had just one language and one vocabulary. Then the world’s people migrated from the east and settled in the plain of Shinar. This is ancient Sumer in southern Mesopotamia (today, southern Iraq) and also known as Babylonia.

Here they developed construction techniques learning how to make bricks instead of stone and bitumen as mortar. Bricks were so easy to make and so convenient when compared to the tedious process of cutting stone. Buildings could be bigger and constructed so much more quickly. Stone and mortar were used as building materials in Canaan, rocky country where the Israelites lived. Stone was scarce in Mesopotamia so mud brick and bitumen were used, as indicated by archaeological excavations.

The people in Shinar decided to build a whole city with a tower that would reach penetrating the heavens. This is a direct reference to the chief ziggurat of Babylon, the E-sag-ila, signifying “the house that raises high its head”. Ziggurats were pyramidic temples intended to serve as staircases from earth to heaven. They were square at the base and had sloping, stepped sides that led to a small shrine at the top. They could be called the earliest ‘skyscrapers’.

They were intended to symbolise the holy mountain and resting-place of the deity and the builders were apparently seeking a means of meeting their god. But the biblical writer sees their project as an act of arrogant pride. The theme of the tower is combined with that of the whole city, as a condemnation of urban civilisation.

They built this tower because “otherwise we shall be scattered abroad over the face of the earth”. As so often, the root of overweening ambition is often fear. (The very rich are often those who were once very poor.)

God was not at all pleased with what he saw. They were all one people, united by a common language and this was only the beginning of what they could do. Nothing will seem impossible. There would be no limits to their unrestrained rebellion against God. The kingdom of Man would try to displace and exclude the kingdom of God (something often seen today).

In order to put a stop to such ambition, God says: “Let us go down, confuse their language and they will not be able to understand one another.” The result was that, divided by mutually incomprehensible languages, they were scattered over the face of the earth and the building of their city had to be abandoned. The very thing they feared took place.

Finally, the city was called Babel, because it was there that the Lord had thrown the language of the earth into confusion and scattered the earth’s peoples in all directions. ‘Babel’ is the Hebrew form of the name ‘Babylon’, originally ‘Bab-ili’ meaning “Gate of the gods”. Apparently the name referred originally only to a certain part of the city, the district near the gate that led to the temple area. There is a play here on the similarly-sounding Hebrew word balil, which means “he confused”.

For the biblical writer, the dream of building a tower reaching up to heaven is just another example of the sinfulness of the human family, this time of their arrogance and pride. It is a repetition of the sin of the man and the woman in the garden who thought they would gain infinite wisdom by eating the forbidden fruit.

There is also a theological explanation of why our single species, once thought to be living in one place and sharing one language, is now so divided by language and why we are scattered and separated over such a wide area.

Arrogance can be found in many places today and a feeling that we are in total control of our lives and our destinies. But a September 11 or a tsunami reminds us just how fragile and contingent our existence really is.

On the positive side, however, the divisions of Babel and mutual incomprehensibility are reversed on the day of Pentecost. As Peter speaks to the crowds coming from so many different places, they are amazed that they can all understand the message. It is a Message for Everyone and one which is in total harmony with the deepest needs and desires of every single person. (Acts 2:5-12) There is a similar gathering of the whole of humanity in the presence of God described in the Book of Revelation (Rev 7:9-10).

It is our mission as followers of Christ to work for the establishment of the Kingdom where all are united in truth and love as brothers and sisters. There is still a lot of work to be done.

Mark 8:34–9:1

Having warned his disciples of the future that lies ahead for him, Jesus now calls the crowds and his disciples together and lets them know in no uncertain terms what following him entails. To be a follower of Jesus is to be ready to go exactly the way that he went.”If anyone wants to be a follower of mine, let him renounce himself and take up his cross and follow me.”

“Whoever wishes to save his life, will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake and that of the Gospel will save it.” This is the paradox. Self-preservation and self-centred aggrandisement leads to nothing, only to a kind of death. Surrendering one’s life totally into a commitment to Jesus and to his Way (as expressed in the Gospel) leads to an enrichment which nothing else can supply.

This is a clear challenge that anyone who wants to follow Jesus must be ready both to suffer and give their lives in love for others. Those who make every effort to preserve their lives and hang on to what they have with no regard for transcendent values or the needs of others are destined to lose everything, not least their integrity, dignity and self-respect.

This was very practical teaching for people who were frequently being persecuted for their Christian faith. Those who betrayed that faith to save their lives or their property had lost something more valuable - their integrity, their wholeness, their consistency.

Undoubtedly many could not live with themselves afterwards. There are certain things which are more important than human life or material possessions.

“What gain, then, is it for a man to win the whole world and ruin [the true meaning of] his life? And indeed what can a man offer in exchange for his life?” We have a long list of martyrs (= witnesses) to the faith whose memories we cherish and whose example we respect and admire. We have no list and no desire to remember those who avoided martyrdom and compromised their faith and their values and who may have enjoyed wealth and position as a result. They lived on for a while and then disappeared; the martyrs are still very much alive.

There are overtones here of a Church in persecution. There must have been those who, when their faith was challenged, “were ashamed of Jesus and his words” and denied their faith to save their immediate lives. They will hear the terrible words cited in Matthew’s gospel: “I do not know you.”

The final phrase is ambivalent: “There are some standing here who will not taste death until they see that the Kingdom of God has come in power.” That can refer to the establishment of the Christian communities, as witnesses to the Kingdom being established in the world, which will be the result of the great experience at Pentecost. It can also refer, of course, to a belief among many in the early Church that the Second Coming of Jesus, the Parousia, would take place in their lifetime.

Week 6 | Saturday

Hebrews 11:1-7

We have come to the end of our current readings of the Creation and Fall narrative from Genesis and we conclude the week with a passage from Hebrews which affirms that it was their faith, trust and confidence in God which guided the good people of those early days.

The whole chapter (our reading only has the first seven verses) paints an inspiring picture of religious faith, firm and unyielding in the face of all obstacles.”These pages rank among the most lofty and eloquent to be found the Bible.” The three examples given today are taken from the first nine chapters of Genesis. The New American Bible describes it thus:

The author gives the most extensive description of faith provided in the New Testament, though his interest does not lie in a technical, theological definition. In view of the needs of his audience he describes what authentic faith does, not what it is in itself. Through faith God guarantees the blessings to be hoped for from him, providing evidence in the gift of faith that what he promises will eventually come to pass:

Because they accepted in faith God’s guarantee of the future, the biblical personages discussed in vv. 3-38 were themselves commended by God

Christians have even greater reason to remain firm in faith since they, unlike the OT men and women of faith, have perceived the beginning of God’s fulfilment of his messianic promises (39-40).

The reason for this emphasis on faith is that the Jewish Christians, the ‘Hebrews’ to whom the author is writing have become discouraged because of persecution. He now emphasises that it is only what is future and what is invisible that gives them hope. The examples taken from the lives of Old Testament saints are meant to give them courage and illustrate how faith is the source of patience and strength.

The reading opens with a description, rather than a proper definition, of faith.”Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen”. Later, this verse was adopted as a theological definition of faith. It is a matter much more of deep trust in God rather than the holding of religious ‘truths’. Again, faith is not just something subjective. Although what is believed in cannot be seen, the unseen realities are tested and ‘proved’ by experience. And the examples given here are such experiences.

It is faith that helps us realise that the visible world is truly the work of the invisible word of God, “what is seen was made from things that cannot be seen”. In our own lives, we will find that when we commit ourselves totally to the vision of Christ, it brings a deep satisfaction and sense of peace into our lives, even when external circumstances may be difficult.

In the second part of the reading, three examples are mentioned as examples of deep faith: Abel, Enoch and Noah.

The first example is Abel.”By faith” Abel offered a sacrifice which was more pleasing to God than Cain’s. It was a sign of Abel’s righteousness that God accepted his offerings. In fact, the Cain and Abel narrative in Gen 4:1-16 does not mention Abel’s faith. It does say, however, that God “looked with favour on Abel and his offering” (Gen 4:4). The author of Hebrews understands God’s favour as having been activated by the faith of Abel and not simply because of what he was offering, although there does seem to be, in this period, a bias for the agricultural over the pastoral, fruits of the earth rather than animals.

Abel died at the hands of his jealous brother yet, because of his faith, he still speaks to us. Genesis quotes God as saying that the blood of Abel “cries out to me from the soil” (Gen 4:10) but the author of Hebrews is more probably saying that the repeated story of Abel provides ongoing witness to faith.

Next, we have the example of Enoch. Enoch is a character whose name occurs in a genealogy of the generations from Adam to Noah (Genesis chap. 5). He was the son of Jared and father of Methusaleh, legendary for his long life of 969 years. We know practically nothing else about Enoch except that he lived to be 365 years. He is distinguished from the other patriarchs in several ways: his life is shorter but his years number those of the days in a solar year, he therefore attains a perfect age and he “walks with God”, as Noah did. But then “he was no longer here, for God took him” (Gen 5:24). In the Book of Ecclesiasticus (Sirach) we also read: “Enoch walked with the Lord and was taken up that succeeding generations might learn by his example” (Eccl 44:16). Like Elijah, he vanishes mysteriously, carried off by God.

The clear implication is that he did not die in the usual way but, like Elijah (2 Kings 2:11ff), was taken alive to the presence of God. Hebrews says that, before he was taken, there was clear evidence that “he had pleased God”. This expression follows the Greek translation of Gen 5:22, which in the Hebrew reads “walked with God” - but the meanings can clearly be the same. God is surely pleased with anyone who walks with him.

Because of his friendship with God (not otherwise described here or elsewhere in the Bible) and also by reason of his unusual disappearance from the earth, Enoch’s reputation was great among the Chosen People, particularly in the two centuries just before the coming of Christ. He was held up as a model of piety and certain apocryphal books bear his name.

The author then comments that without faith it is impossible to please God. For, anyone who wants to approach God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him. The faith that is essential for our salvation has two objects: belief in the existence of one personal God, who by his very nature cannot be seen, and belief that God will reward all effort spent in searching for him. This is, as we have said, much more a question of surrendering to the God we cannot see than simply stating a conviction that he exists. The Greek word for ‘faith’ is pistis which basically means ‘trust’.

Lastly, Noah, warned by God about events not yet apparent, trusted, put his faith, in God’s word and built the ark to save his household. In doing so, he condemned the rest of the unbelieving and corrupt world and became an heir to the righteousness that follows faith.

Let us pray that our faith too may grow stronger and stronger that we may be ever more open to God’s working in our lives. May he help us especially to see him at work in times of pain and difficulty.

Mark 9:2-13

The strange event we know as the Transfiguration follows immediately after the confession of Peter about Jesus’ identity as Messiah and the foretelling of his rejection, sufferings and death at the hands of his own people which came as such a shock to the disciples.

Today’s experience seems to be a kind of glimpse of Jesus as the Son of God to prepare them for when the Passion actually takes place. Only the three closest companions of Jesus - Peter, James and John - are chosen for this experience.

They go up a high mountain, traditionally recognised as Mount Tabor, but it does not really matter. Mountains in Scripture are holy places where God is especially present:

Moses received the Law on a mountain; the new Moses, Jesus, gave his Law in the Sermon on the Mountain, Jesus is often described as going into the mountains to pray.

Suddenly they see Jesus as they have never seen him before - in dazzling glory. Then on either side appear Elijah and Moses talking with Jesus. The meaning is clear. Moses represents the Law and Elijah the tradition of the prophets. Between them they are the summation of all God’s revelations to his people and they are endorsing Jesus as the continuation of that tradition.

Peter, in his usual impetuosity, gets carried away.”It is wonderful for us to be here.” He wants to set up three shrines: one each for Jesus, Moses and Elijah.

Then a cloud covers everything. In scriptural imagery this clearly speaks of the presence of God himself. Compare the cloud that covered Moses on the mountain as he conversed with God. Compare the pillar of cloud that accompanied the Israelites through the desert.

From within the cloud comes a voice, which can only be the voice of God himself: “This is my Son, the Beloved. Listen to him.” This is now the endorsement of the Father himself for Jesus. The words that just previously they found difficult to accept they are now being told to listen to very carefully. Jesus, as Son, speaks with the voice of God. We too need to listen to everything that Jesus says both by his words and his actions.

Then everything is suddenly over and they see “only Jesus”. The Jesus of everyday life, looking not very different from anyone else. The way he appears in our life too. But we have to continue listening to him wherever and however we encounter him.

As they come down from the mountain, the disciples are told not to say anything until Jesus is risen from the dead. Jesus does not want any misunderstandings or distortions of what has just happened to be disseminated. The gospel says they observed this instruction even though they were puzzled about what “risen from the dead” might mean.

They also asked about the expected appearance of Elijah before the coming of the Messiah. Jesus the Messiah has come but where was Elijah? Jesus replies that Elijah has come and it is understood Jesus was referring to John the Baptist, who, like Jesus, also suffered.

Week 7 | Monday

Sirach 1:1-10

Today we begin reading the book of Sirach. We should be with it for the coming two weeks but, this year there will be only two days of reflections because Lent begins on Wednesday, with its own readings.

Sirach is one of the so-called deutero-canonical books and is not part of the Jewish canon nor is it recognised by many Protestant churches. In older bibles it is usually called the ‘Book of Ecclesiasticus’. In Greek it was known as the ‘Wisdom of Jesus Ben Sirach’ from which the current name derives. The book, which was originally written in Hebrew, dates from about 190 BC and was translated into Greek about 60 years later. It is the Greek version which we normally translate from nowadays.

It has been described as an encyclopaedia on good religion and wise living. In fact, it forms part of the Wisdom literature of the Hebrew Testament. It was used so much by the Church over the centuries that it came to be called “Ecclesiasticus”, the ‘Church Book’ (from ecclesia, the Latin for ‘church’ and ekklesia, the Greek word used in the New Testament for the Christian assembly. It literally means ‘the gathering of those who are called out’).

Today the author speaks of the mystery of wisdom. He speaks of true wisdom, namely, God’s external revelation of himself. (Later, in Jesus, we can see the incarnate Wisdom of God.) Throughout the book he describes in great detail just what wisdom is; sometimes it is divine; sometimes it is a synonym for God’s law; sometimes it is human. But the author makes clear that even human wisdom, properly understood, ultimately comes from God.

Today’s reading is a poem about personified wisdom as the creation of the Lord God. It combines both the hiddenness, the inaccessibility of wisdom on the one hand with its availability to humans, especially those whose lives are in harmony with God.

All wisdom, says the author, originates from “the Lord”, its ultimate source. The term ‘Lord’ (Kyrios) in the Greek Old Testament (Septuagint) is the normal translation of ‘Yahweh’, the unspeakable name of God in Hebrew. The author of Sirach uses the term constantly, even when translating other divine titles.

Only God can grasp the enormity of our universe from end to end. Its unfathomable immensity continues to boggle our minds as we penetrate deeper and deeper into it. Only the Creator knows the number of grains of sand by the sea, or can count the drops when rain falls, or the length of eternity. Here we have the aspect of total wisdom as something unattainable, a theme which goes through Sirach.

The implication is that only God possesses the fullness of Wisdom. Only Someone who can understand all these things can have complete Wisdom. Such Wisdom precedes all creation and has no beginning in time. Only one Person knows the root of Wisdom, only one Person can understand its subtlest elements. There is only One who is truly Wise and that is the Creator God, who reigns over all.

He is the Source of all Wisdom.”It is He who created her.” Here the author makes use of an architectural image. Wisdom is seen as a plan or model for creating the universe.

Here the author emphasises the uniqueness and sublime nature of God. Wisdom is a special attribute of God which is reflected in the whole of creation and is a special gift to humanity. Although it is personified with ‘she’ here and in other Wisdom literature, in this work it is clearly something created and not to be identified with God. For Sirach, it is in God, comes from God but is not God. For John, in the Prologue to his gospel, there is a somewhat different understanding: the Word was with God and the Word was God and the Word existed from all eternity.

It is God who “poured her out on all his works”. It is He who has passed her on to us and “lavished her upon those who love Him”. He has shared his Wisdom with all creation. A deep study of nature reveals the Wisdom of God present everywhere, “the world is charged with the grandeur of God”. And he shares it in a special with us and, most of all, with “those who love him”. There is a special wisdom for those who are deeply united with God in love and service. In fact, we can and do say that to love God is the beginning of wisdom.

Since Wisdom here is personified as a ‘she’ so some like to see the Spirit of God as feminine. God, of course, and the Trinity are above and inclusive of all gender and sex. The Father is not exclusively male nor is the ‘Son’ who proceeds from the ‘Father’. The Incarnate, Enfleshed Son in Jesus is male but many would see in Jesus’ character all the best characteristics of both the masculine and the feminine - an ideal for all men and women.

Wisdom is not a question of knowledge although some knowledge must be a constituent element. Wisdom is the gift to be able to see the whole and to see the inter-relatedness of all the parts. It can only come from experience and applied insight. It is not normally a characteristic of the very young or the very superficial. It is a question of looking into not just looking at. The experts on the “Mastermind” programme were often dazzlingly knowledgeable and very clever but they may not have been wise.

Ultimately, to grow in Christ is to grow in wisdom. It is to grow into a deeper understanding of the meaning and direction of life. It is a gift God wishes us to have so let us ask him for it today.

Mark 9:14-29

As Jesus comes down the mountain of the Transfiguration with Peter, James and John, they find the rest of the disciples surrounded by a large crowd. They are in a deep argument with some Scribes, the experts on the Jewish law. Jesus wants to know what they are arguing about.

A man comes forward and describes some terrible symptoms his son is experiencing. He had asked Jesus’ disciples to exorcise this demon but they were not able to do so. Reading the passage with contemporary eyes it is possible for us to see in the boy’s symptoms some kind of epilepsy attack. It is understandable that people in those days would see in it some kind of evil possession. A person with epilepsy seems to behave in very bizarre ways and to be in the control of some external power.

“You faithless generation!” Jesus exclaims. He asks that the boy be brought to him. Immediately the boy has another attack, lying writhing on the ground, foaming at the mouth - all typical symptoms of an epileptic attack.

The father says the boy has been like that since birth and then he makes a heart-rending plea, “If you can do anything, have compassion on us and help us.” Jesus’ response is immediate: “If you can! Everything is possible for anyone who has faith.” Jesus does not just help people who ask. They must have a firm trust and confidence in God. We were told earlier that in Nazareth Jesus was able to do very little healing because the people there had no faith or trust in him.

The man comes back with a magnificent response, “I do have faith. Help the little faith I have!” That is the paradox of faith. It is something that we must have in order to come under the power of God and yet it is also something he has to give us first.

This was enough for Jesus. He immediately drove out the force that was afflicting the boy. It involved one more last attack, leaving him lying on the ground like a corpse so that the onlookers thought he was dead. Epileptics can look like that at the end of an attack.

Then Jesus took the boy by the hand and lifted him up.”And he was able to stand.” As often happens in the Gospel, healing and a restoration to wholeness means standing up, sharing in the resurrection, the new life, of Jesus.

Afterwards, when Jesus’ disciples were alone with him, they asked why they could not heal the boy. Jesus tells them that this kind of the problem “can only be driven out by prayer”. Did that mean that they had been trying to heal the boy by their own efforts? Were they beginning to think that the power that had been given them was their own? That they had failed to realise they were just channels of God’s healing power? Jesus spent long hours in prayer before and after his teaching and healing works. We cannot expect to do otherwise.

Week 7 | Tuesday

Sirach 2:1-11

Today’s reading from Sirach consists of advice on what to do when things are going against us.

It opens with the address “My child”. This is a typical introduction for a passage of teaching in wisdom literature. It recurs here and there throughout Sirach.

We might summarise today’s reading as saying that:

Serving God is not without its trials ; moreover, this service must be given with sincerity, perseverance and fidelity.

Misfortunes and humiliations help to purify people and prove their worth.

Patience and unwavering trust in God are always rewarded with the benefits of God’s compassion and result in lasting joy.

First, we are told to be ready for testing situations, which are all bound to face at one time or another. This is a favourite Old Testament theme and also found in the Gospel and the rest of the New Testament. St Paul is eloquent on this, not least, when speaking of his own experience. See 2 Cor 11:21ff, which are the readings for Friday and Saturday of the 11th Week in Ordinary Time.

In order to be ready for such times, we should make sure that our heart is focused on God’s will in our lives and to be firm and consistent. At the same time, we ought not react impetuously when things go badly wrong. It is a time for reflection and discernment. By staying close to God we can ensure that our “last days may be prosperous”. Not just in the material sense but in being genuinely enriched in those areas of our life where it really counts.

Without being fatalistic, we need to meet positively whatever happens to us and in times when we feel belittled to practice patience.”Gold is tested in fire and in the furnace of humiliation.” What at the time may seem painful and destructive experiences can be a source of strengthening and maturing if undergone in the right frame of mind.

Second, we are advised to stay close to God, who will give us strength, and to face up to realities which cannot be avoided.

On the one hand, we put our trust in God and in his help. Do our best to live upright lives and put our hope in God’s care for us. But escaping from reality is not going to provide a solution.

“You, who fear the Lord, wait for his mercy;
do not stray, or else you may fall.
You who fear the Lord, trust in him,
and your reward will not be lost.
You who fear the Lord, hope for good things,
for lasting joy and mercy.”

These are the qualities of those who “fear the Lord”. ‘Fear’ here does not mean ‘being afraid’ but rather submitting ourselves in deep reverence to an awesome God who is so far beyond anything we can imagine. This God, awesome though he is, is a source of compassion, worthy of our trust and hope, and the ultimate source of joy and happiness.

For those, who are close to God and accept his truth, humiliation by other people is purely an external experience. As the song says, no one can take away my dignity, no matter what insults or degradations they throw at me.”Consider the generations of old,” advises Sirach. He is speaking of those among our predecessors who followed the advice given here. Sirach will give many examples in chaps. 44-50.

And he goes on to ask: “Has anyone trusted in the Lord and been disappointed? Or has anyone persevered in the fear of the Lord and been forsaken? Called upon him and been neglected?” These questions can only be answered by direct experience but there is abundant evidence from the lives of the saints and other servants of God that the answer to all these questions is a resounding ‘No’.

And, if we do fail in our service of God, let us remember that “compassionate and merciful is the Lord, he forgives sins, he saves in time of trouble”. The Lord’s compassion and his saving his people in time of trouble is a common theme in the Psalms and the prophets. And it confirmed again and again in the life of Jesus and proved forever by his dying on the cross in the greatest act of love that anyone do for others.

Perhaps, in addition to being confident of God’s compassion for our sins and weaknesses, we might try to show the same compassion for those who “offend” us.

Mark 9:30-37

Jesus was now spending more time with his disciples and teaching them. He was teaching them things that the crowds were not yet ready to hear. As we will see, his disciples were not too ready either.

Today we have the second of three predictions of Jesus’ passion, death and resurrection which he communicates to his disciples. On each occasion, the pattern is exactly the same:

a prediction of what is going to happen to Jesus

total lack of comprehension of the meaning of what Jesus is saying on the part of the disciples

a teaching of Jesus arising out of their lack of understanding.

The prediction is stated simply:

Jesus will be “handed over into the hands of others”. This is the standard term used many times. John the Baptist is handed over; Jesus is handed over; the disciples later on will be handed over; and, in the Eucharist, the Body of Jesus is handed over for our sakes (“This is my Body, which will be handed over [tradetur] for you”).

he will be put to death

three days later he will rise again.

They arrive in Capernaum and, in the house, Jesus asks them a question. (Once again we have a reference to the ‘house’ with overtones of the church, the place where God’s people gather, as they do here to listen to the Word of God.) Jesus asks his disciples what seems an innocuous question: “What were you arguing about on the road?”

Here we have another important word of Mark’s: “road” (Greek, hodos). In the context of the Gospel it has theological overtones. Jesus is the Way or the Road and Christians are those who walk on this Way or Road. The disciples arguing then has implications about Christians arguing among themselves as they follow Christ ‘on the road’.

Jesus’ question is met with an embarrassed silence because they had been arguing among themselves which of them was the greatest. The minute the question was asked they knew they were in the wrong. Why were they arguing about this? I once heard it suggested that, as Jesus had now for the second time announced his coming death, they were beginning to accept the possibility of it really happening. They began to wonder what would happen to them as a group without Jesus. Who would be in charge? Which of them had the best qualifications? Hence their argument. If that was the case, then Jesus’ question was even more embarrassing. They could hardly say, “Well, we were wondering which one of us would take over when you are no longer with us.”

Jesus, of course, knew exactly what was going on in their minds so he gave them some guidelines if they wanted to be truly his followers.”If anyone wants to be first, he must make himself last of all and servant of all.” This is quite a hard saying and most of us find it difficult to put fully into practice. It is, of course, totally in opposition to what goes on in the secular world where “success” means being on top, being in charge, being in control, calling the shots.

Yet, who are really the greatest people in our society? Is it not those, especially those who are especially talented intellectually or in other ways, who use their talents totally for the well-being of others to the point of even sacrificing their lives?

Apart from the obvious example of Jesus himself, we have many of the great saints. In our own times we have marvellous people like Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Dorothy Day, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Oscar Romero, Jean Vanier, Mother Teresa. It is a long list but they all have one thing in common: they put themselves totally at the service of their brothers and sisters. Success, promotion, status, material wealth, executive power meant nothing to these people. They served and in serving was their power, a power which inspires in a way that no mere politician or business tycoon or dictator could ever do.

To serve is not to be submissive or weak; it is not putting oneself on a lower level than those being served. It is simply to be totally committed to the good of others and to find one’s own well-being in being so committed.

Jesus then takes a little child, as a symbol of all those who are vulnerable, weak and exploitable. Children are used by Jesus as symbols of the anawim, the lowly and weak in our society. They are the ones who are most of all to be served and protected and nurtured. In so doing one is recognising the presence of Jesus and the presence of God in them.

As Christians, we have much to be proud of in our record of service to our brothers and sisters, especially those who are weak and vulnerable. But we also have to confess that within our Church and in our dealings with the “world” we have had our fair share of hungering for power, status and position. And we have so often argued bitterly with each other “on the Road”, about just such things.

Week 7 | Wednesday

Sir 4:11-19

Today’s passage deals with wisdom, personified as an educator.”She teaches her children and gives help to those who seek her”. There then follows a series of comments about the qualities and effects of wisdom in people’s lives. The precious fruits of wisdom: life, favour, blessings, God’s love, are intended to arouse desire for her. Whoever loves her loves life, those who wait on her early will be filled with happiness.

This will naturally happen, because it is through wisdom that we come to a fuller understanding of what a true life is all about and with the living out of that understanding comes happiness.

To adhere to Wisdom is to pave the way to inherit final glory.”The Lord blesses the place she enters.” Where there is Wisdom, there is God. There is an echo here of entering the Temple, the place where God is present.”Those who serve her minister to the Holy One and the Lord loves those who love her.”

In a similar context, her disciples are like priests, who enter into the holy places of the Temple to find God. For God himself is the source of all wisdom; there is only one Truth. As we come closer to that truth we come close to God.”Those who obey her will judge the nations and who listen to her will live secure.” Wisdom’s adherents are like judges. True Wisdom gives one criteria by which to evaluate the world around one, and those who “listen to her” will experience a sense of security. They have a sense that they are in the right place and doing the right things.

People who remain faithful to God’s call - especially as it comes to us through the Word of God - will continually seek to open themselves to receive Wisdom and be enriched by it. Seekers of wisdom are here seen as faithful marriage partners, who open themselves fully to each other. And what they learn will be passed on to those who come after. Thanks to our forebears, we are indeed the recipients of centuries of Wisdom passed on to us.

However, there is another dimension to Wisdom which should be ready for. The search for wisdom is no guarantee of an easy life. She can bring us through “winding ways” in our search for the truth; she can bring “fear and dread” and “test us with her ordeals”. Indeed, it is often through the most painful and frightening experiences of life as we come face to face with failure, disappointment, sickness and death, that we gradually grow into real wisdom about the most important things in life.

On the other hand, to go our own way and to abandon the search for Wisdom and the search for wisdom is to give up the search for truth and the way of love. There is no future there. Only self-destruction.

As we said before, the acquisition of wisdom does not just come from the piling up of knowledge and information. It does not require a high level of literacy. Even the most illiterate person can be steeped in wisdom. The greatest teacher of wisdom is our immersion in life and in finding God’s Truth and Goodness and Beauty embedded in every experience of life, even the most painful.

Mark 9:38-40

There is another lesson for all of us in today’s brief passage. The disciples complain to Jesus because they saw someone casting out devils in Jesus’ name. They tried to stop him “because he was not one of us”. Jesus tells them very clearly that they should not try to stop such a person.”No one who works a miracle in my name is likely to speak evil of me. Anyone who is not against us is for us.”

This is a principle we need to take seriously to heart. There can be a strong temptation among us to a kind of exclusivity. Many Christian groups (both Catholic and people from other denominations) can fall into this trap. As Paul tells us in one of his letters, the word of God is not bound. God can do his work through all kinds of people - Christians and people of other religions and of no religion. He may even work at times through people who are ostensibly anti-religious. Far from being resentful of others doing work which we feel belongs only to Christians, we should be overjoyed. This is a clear sign of the Kingdom at work. Wherever there is love, wherever there is service, there is God.

Membership of our group is not the test. The test is whether what others do fits in with our goals of truth, love, justice, compassion, freedom, peace, non-violence and so on. Our God is to be found in all these things. The Church is a way to a further goal; it is not itself the end. It is called to be a sign of the Kingdom but is not the totality of the Kingdom. The goal is the Kingdom and the Church is working - and not exclusively - for the realisation of the Kingdom.

Week 7 | Thursday

Sir 5:1-8

The passage speaks of our attitudes to wealth, power and false confidence and consists of a number of distinct pieces of advice on how we should behave. It comes from the first part of a 22-line poetic arrangement of warnings on the disastrous consequences of false presumptions, wrong speech and shameful behaviour. It is particularly directed against the evils of the rich which tend to pride and a sense of independence, presumption, false security and no regrets for what they do. They are playing a very dangerous game.

“Do not give your heart to your money or say, ‘With this I have enough’.” There are some who believe that with wealth they can get or have anything, that wealth will give them power to control and manipulate others. Money alone is never enough. Having money has little to do with wisdom or happiness.

“Do not be led by your appetites and energy to follow the passions of your heart.” The passions of our heart can lead us very far astray and bring about our own self-destruction. Pleasure and happiness are two very different things.

“Do not say, ‘Who has authority over me?’, for the Lord will surely punish you.” Wealth can give one a sense of total self-sufficiency, a belief that with money one can get anything one wants, and that one is answerable to no one. And yet, the rich person is, in many respects, just as vulnerable as one who is materially destitute. A tiny blood clot in the wrong place can bring a sudden end to everything. The ultimate life decisions are never ours.

“Do not say, ‘I have sinned and what happened to me?’, for the Lord is slow to anger.” One may be very aware of leading a life which is immoral and unjust but nothing bad has happened so one keeps acting immorally. That is because “the Lord is slow to anger”. This phrase comes from the time the Israelites rebelled against God at Mount Sinai. But instead of punishing them Yahweh gave them a second chance and told them: “The Lord, the Lord, a merciful and gracious God, slow to anger and rich in kindness and fidelity, continuing his kindness for a thousand generations and forgiving wickedness and crime and sin” (Exod 34:6-7). God’s bias is towards forgiveness and mercy but there is a limit. In the end, sin and immorality will have to be paid for. The unrepentant wrongdoers put themselves outside God’s mercy.

“Do not be so confident of forgiveness that you add sin to sin.” This is similar to the previous injunction. We can be sure of God’s forgiveness when we repent but it never justifies our deliberately continuing to act in ways that are evil and immoral, like someone who says he will continue his sinful life but will make a “good confession” at the end. Once aware of behaving in ways that are in disharmony with the Way shown to us by Jesus, we must abandon such behaviour now.

“Do not say, ‘His mercy is great, he will forgive the multitude of my sins’, for both mercy and wrath are with him and his anger will rest on sinners.” Another similar warning. Yes, God’s mercy is great and his forgiveness is always there for us but, as long as we are turned away from him, we close the door on that mercy and forgiveness. The Prodigal Son could only be reconciled when he “came to his senses” and turned back to his Father.

“Do not delay to turn back to the Lord and do not postpone it from day to day, for suddenly the Lord’s wrath will blaze out and at the time of punishment you will perish.” Repentance must follow immediately on our awareness of going the wrong way. If God comes for us and we are facing in the wrong direction, knowingly doing what we know to be very wrong, we may hear those terrible words, “I do not know you.” (Matt 25:12). And, of course, we do not know when he will come for us. As we know, it can happen very suddenly and to anyone.

Finally, “Do not set your heart on ill-gotten gains; they will be of no use to you on the day of disaster.” Immorally acquired wealth may get us far in the world of business and the world of expensive indulgence but it will do nothing for us on the day we hear the final call. We remember Jesus’ parable about the rich fool, who felt so rich that he could put his feet up and have a long life of enjoyment ahead of him. How wrong he was! (Luke 12:13-21). All that matters is here and now to find and recognise and serve Jesus in every other person but especially those in need of any kind.

Mark 9:41-50

Today the Gospel speaks of scandals. It is a much used word in our newspapers today and not always with the same meaning that we find in the Gospel. In the media it tends to refer to behaviour which we do not expect from certain classes of people. We read about it and we say, “How terrible! How wicked!” In the Gospel, however, scandals are stumbling blocks which impede our journey along Christ’s Way. If a president dilly-dallies with a young lady in his office that is scandalous in the media sense but it is not likely to affect the living out of my Christian faith.

The Way of Christ is expressed in love and compassion and, wherever that happens, the action is noted and rewarded. So anyone who gives a disciple even a drink of water, precisely because that person is known to be a follower of Christ, will not go unrewarded. That “anyone” is to be taken with full literalness. It could be a person of a completely different religion or of none. And one would hope that we would do exactly the same in return.

On the other hand, anyone who corrupts the beliefs of a simple believer is only fit for a fate worse than death. And that applies most of all to fellow believers who, by their actions, can be an obstacle to a person following Christ or coming to know Christ.

But, even within ourselves, there can be things in our lives which can block our living out of the Gospel message. A wandering hand may steal, may hurt, may sexually abuse; it would be better to be without a hand than to allow it to do such things. A wandering foot may bring us to places where we are corrupted or cause corruption to others. It would be better to be crippled than to be involved in such things. A wandering eye can result in our treating other people, however beautiful and attractive, as mere objects of desire and may lead to worse things. We can read books which may lead us to thoughts and actions harmful both to ourselves and others. There are many possibilities. Blindness would be a lesser evil.

Obviously, Jesus is not urging us to carry out such amputations literally. His point is to warn us of the many things which can be stumbling blocks in our Christian lives. Perhaps we could reflect a little today and try to enumerate the things that get between us and our following of Jesus.

“Everyone will be salted with fire.” To be salted is to be purified and kept from corruption. This can refer either to penalties by which a sinner is punished and at the same time preserved or to the purifying trials through which we are made more faithful followers. This is the kind of ‘amputation’ that can apply to those who have caused scandal.

This purification can happen through the trials which the Christian is likely to face in the faithful living out of the Gospel. But if the salt itself loses its taste, what can be used to give taste back to it? “Keep salt in your hearts and you will be at peace with one another.” Salt here seems to be the inner essence of the message of Jesus. That is certainly the key to peace in our own hearts and in our relationships with those around us. And if that salt is within us we are not likely to be a stumbling block to others looking for Christ and his Way.

Week 7 | Friday

Sir 6:5-17

Sirach today gives some advice on friendship. He has some wise things to say.

Friendship was an important concept in social relations during the Hellenistic period and is referred to several times in Sirach (9:10; 11:29-14:2; 22:19-26; 37:1-6). In Greek literature of the time, a friend was one who remained true in times of distress and could therefore be trusted with one’s official or private interests and affairs. Today’s reading brings to an end a section of instructions and admonitions which test one’s resolve, integrity, and capacity for making judgements in keeping with wisdom piety. - Harper-Collins Study Bible, edited)

True friends are discerned not by how much money they have but whether they will continue to stand by one in times of difficulty and misfortune. Such friends are rare and their value is beyond estimation.

The word ‘friend’ is one we tend to use very casually and we call people friends with whom we have only a relatively superficial acquaintance. Or we term as friends people who are useful in getting things we want. A genuine friend, with whom one can open oneself completely and in whom can have total trust, is not easy to find.

Some of the points made today are worth considering:

Friends are won by our speaking kindly and being courteous to people. Why do some people seem to have lots of close friends and others have very few? Perhaps one of the main reasons is here. To find a friend one has first to be a friend.

People with whom you are friendly can be many but a close adviser and confidant will be “one in a thousand”. As we said, the word ‘friend’ can be used very loosely. It is genuine friendship that we are speaking of here.

“Take them on trial and be in no hurry to trust them.” True friendships, which are based on genuine love, take time to develop. Mutual attraction is not enough.

Sirach gives a few examples of what we would now call “fair-weather” friends:

“One kind of friend is only so when it suits him but will not stand by you in your day of trouble…

“Another kind of friend will fall out with you and to your dismay make your quarrel public (one thinks of bitter divorce proceedings)…

“A third kind of friend will share your table but not stand by you in your day of trouble; when you are prosperous, they become your second self and lord it over your servants, but if ever you fall on hard times they will turn against you and will hide themselves from you…” Good examples of genuine friendships are when one spouse is stricken with a serious and long-term illness.

- Sirach advises us to keep clear of those who are hostile to us (but we also have to remember the Gospel injunction to pray for them and be ready to forgive them and be reconciled with them)… but at the same time to “be wary of your friends”, that is, those who call themselves friends but who, in time of stress, are likely to ditch you…

Finally, Sirach speaks of the true friend, a treasure more valuable than anything money can buy:

“A faithful friend is a sure shelter, whoever finds one has found a rare treasure. A faithful friend is something beyond price, there is no measuring their worth. A faithful friend is like life-saving medicine, the elixir of life, and those who fear the Lord will find one.”

True friendship is based on love and, where there is love, God is inevitably present, for God is love.

Last of all, an astute piece of advice: “Whoever fears the Lord makes true friends, for as people are, so are their friends.” This last phrase may mean “one’s friends are as dear to one as oneself” but also “one’s friend will inevitably be, like oneself, a God-fearing person”.

When we live in truth and integrity, we live in God; and we are likely to make friends whose lives are also based on truth and integrity. There can really be no other kind of true friend.

Probably, the greatest tragedy in life is never to have had really close and intimate friends. The sign of a true friend is the sense of emptiness that comes on permanent separation because of death or some other irreversible reason.

Mark 10:1-12

Jesus is approached by some Pharisees and they ask him if it is lawful for a man to divorce his wife. We are told they asked him this question in order to put him to the test. It is another example of their efforts to find Jesus on the wrong side of the Mosaic law.

As frequently happens, Jesus answers with another question: “What did Moses command you?” They reply that Moses allowed a man to make out a writ of dismissal and so divorce his wife. They are quoting from the Book of Deuteronomy which says:

Supposing a man has taken a wife and consummated the marriage; but she has not pleased him and he has found some impropriety of which to accuse her; so he has made out a writ of divorce for her and handed it to her and then dismissed her from his house; she leaves his home and goes away to become the wife of another man. If this other man takes a dislike to her and makes out a writ of divorce for her and hands it to her and dismisses her from his house (or if this other man who took her as his wife happens to die), her first husband, who has repudiated her, may not take her back as his wife now that she has been defiled in this way” (Deut 24:1-4).

Jesus clearly is not happy with this teaching and says Moses allowed divorce to accommodate the moral weakness of the people (that is, primarily the men!). He challenges this stand with words from the creation story in Genesis: “God made them male and female… This is why a man must leave father and mother and the two become one body” (Gen 1:27; 2:24). After marriage, then, he says that there are not two separate people but one body. And from that Jesus concludes: “What God has united, humans must not divide.”

When they were back in the ‘house’ (that house again, the place where Jesus’ disciples are gathered about him - the church), Jesus’ disciples expressed their misgivings about what they had just heard. But Jesus went even further: a man who divorces his wife and marries another is guilty of adultery and a woman who divorces her husband and marries another is also guilty of adultery. He does not recognise divorce. One gets the impression that this teaching of Jesus came as something of a shock to them.

In a sound and enduring marriage the words of Jesus are realised. One meets people who have been married for decades and are as deeply in love with each other, in fact more so, than on the day of their wedding. One has only to see bereaved spouses to realise the terrible void that is left when a partner of many years dies. They feel as if a part of themselves had been torn from them. It can take years for life to come back to some kind of normalcy.

However, in our own day divorce has become a very common phenomenon. In some societies, the divorce rate is almost half of all marriages and in most societies all over the world it is increasing. Marriages between Catholics are also seriously affected. Obviously it is a very complex question and cannot be dealt with here.

Perhaps two comments could be made:

Jesus is attacking a situation where men, when they got tired of their spouse and found someone more interesting, simply wrote a piece of paper and unilaterally dumped the first wife, leaving her high and dry. Jesus rightly deplores such a situation. His final remark indicates something new for his time (and often not yet accepted in our own): equal rights and equal responsibilities for both partners. Women are not commodities to be picked up and dropped off at will.

Divorce as we experience it in our society today often involves a genuine breakdown in the marriage relationship which neither partner wishes and which is a cause of deep pain and suffering to both sides. It may be due to some element of immaturity at the time of marriage or the partners growing apart as they develop as persons. Whatever the reason, this situation is quite different from the one Jesus is speaking of. One feels that Jesus would be most sympathetic to the painful breakdowns of marriage which happen today and, as Christians, we too should try to empathise with people in such a situation.

Most people enter into marriage with good will and with the intention of having an enduring, lifelong relationship. It is a hope sometimes not realised. At the same time, we also have in our society today a pluralistic approach to the concept of marriage from merely seeing it as two people living together “as long as it feels good” to those who believe in marriage as a permanent relationship “in good times and bad”. And everything in between.

We need to remember that the Church accepts that marriages can break down and that for various reasons the couple may need to have their separation made legal by a divorce settlement in court. What the Church forbids is remarriage. However, many Catholics do remarry in a civil ceremony and we need to deal with such people with great sympathy and understanding if they express a sincere desire to remain active members of the Christian community.

The ideal that Jesus proposes remains but a changing society may need a different approach to marriage where the emphasis is more on the relationship and less on the legal contract. A truly pastoral Church will need to help people live the Gospel in such a changing sociological situation. As always, the solution will lie in answering the question: “In this situation, what is the loving thing to do as far as all are concerned?”

Week 7 | Saturday

Sir 17:1-15

Sirach today speaks of the relationship between the Creator and the human beings he has made. It is part of a poem in praise of the Lord for the creation of humankind. The author is following the order of Genesis and has already spoken of the creation of stars, plants and animals.

He combines in one the two accounts of the creation of humankind (Gen 1:26-27; 2:7) and interprets the image of God in humans under the headings of authority, strength, and dominion, thus developing a hierarchy of power: God, humans, living beings.

Humans were created by God from the earth, and will at the end return to earth. The First Man had been created a living thing from the earth and at the end is buried and returns to where he came from.

Human life on earth is temporary, but humans were given authority over all other creatures on earth. For God gave humans a special strength and made them to be in his own image: sharing his ability to know and love and share his vision of creation.

Because of this, we were put in charge over all beasts and flying things and God “filled all things with dread of humans”. A generally true statement but there are exceptions where the human is the one who fears.

God shaped for humans a mouth and tongue, eyes and ears, and gave them a heart to think with. The Israelites believed that the heart was the seat of reason rather than the seat of the emotions, as it is for us. The list of faculties for perception is similar to that common to the Stoic tradition. The ‘five faculties’ were sight, touch, smell, hearing and taste.

The human was also filled with knowledge and understanding and given a sense of good and evil. In this way, God’s light was planted in human thinking so that we could appreciate, as other creatures cannot, the magnificence of God’s creation.

In addition to the faculty of knowledge, God also taught us. He endowed us with “the law of life”. This refers to the Law of Moses, which is included in the endowments that God “allotted” to mankind. The gifts of Creation and of Mount Sinai are here telescoped into one act of God.

Their eyes saw his glorious majesty,

Their ears heard the glory of his voice.

A reference to the Israelites’ experience at Mount Sinai.

For us, of course, there is the further teaching that we have received through the Incarnate Son of God and a new “law of life”.”I have come that they may have life, life in greater abundance” (John 10:10).

Our response to all these gifts will be to “praise his holy name, as we tell of the Lord’s magnificent works”. A very important part of our prayer is to praise and thank the Lord for the beauty and gift of his creation.

At Mount Sinai also, God told his people to beware of all wrongdoing and “he gave each a commandment concerning his neighbour”. He did this through the Ten Commandments and the Mosaic Law. And they needed - as we do - to be aware that “their ways are always under his eye, they cannot be hidden from his sight”.

Let each one of us reflect that we too are part of this creation, we have been given these gifts to develop so that we can continue to grow ever more in the likeness of our God. That is the sole purpose of our existence and we forget it at our peril.

Mark 10:13-16

People were bringing young children for Jesus to touch and bless them. (How sad that touching children has become such an object of suspicion in our day. Yet, affectionate affirming touching, properly done, is something that children have a great need of - and not only from their parents. Jesus had no such hang-ups.)

His disciples felt that Jesus, who may have been in the process of giving teaching, was being bothered by these mothers and tried to drive them away. More than once we have seen the officiousness of the disciples who were taking to themselves an authority that not been given them. They still had to learn the lesson that authority serves rather than controls and manipulates. It is a lesson that those in authority in our Church today need also to remember. And it reflects to some extent the low place that children had in adult society, to be neither seen nor heard.

Mark, who likes to record the feelings of Jesus, says that he was quite indignant at his disciples’ behaviour.”Let the little children come to me… for it is to such as these that the kingdom of God belongs.” ‘Children’ here can be taken here in a wider sense to include all those who approach Jesus with a completely open, unprejudiced mind. And also those who have a low status in our society. Such people are often more ready to hear the message of the Kingdom and to take an active part in it.

So Jesus says that only those with the openness and simplicity of a child can enter the Kingdom. These words were, no doubt, addressed to all-knowing Scribes and Pharisees and their like and also to the disciples.

Jesus then took the children, put his arms around them, laid his hands on them and blessed them. Jesus knew the importance of physical touch in communicating with people, in expressing encouragement, affirmation and bringing healing.

The passage can be linked, in a way, with that on scandal earlier on. The disciples, perhaps not deliberately, were blocking access to Jesus by those who were most open to his teaching. As people who are responsible for children, either as parents or teachers or whatever, we need to be aware of how by word or action we can block our children being exposed to the Jesus’ message of Truth and Love. But we can also be a block to other people who can be influenced and turned away from the Way of Christ by our unchristian way of behaving.

Week 8 | Monday

Sirach 17:24-29

A call to the sinner to repent and come back to God.

There is an implication by the author that the Lord will postpone death for a repentant sinner so that he may fulfil his destiny of praising God on earth. In the light of Christian teaching, the gift of final penitence extends this divine purpose into a life with God that never ends.

If we truly repent of the wrong we have done, we can be sure that God’s door is open to receive us back. This is beautifully expressed in Jesus’ parables of the lost sheep, the lost coin and the lost son. A realisation of this should help to dispel any loss of hope which we might have in God’s mercy and compassion.

So we are urged to turn back to the Lord, to convert, to pray in his presence, to leave behind our sinful ways and thereby lessen the effects of our wrongdoing. We do that, above all, by totally identifying ourselves with God and hating intensely all that is morally loathsome. Reflecting the belief of the Jews at the time, the author asks how we can give praise to God once we are in “Hades”, Sheol, the place of the dead. Sheol was understood as a place of no escape and a place where one could no longer actively serve and love God. For the dead, who may as well not exist, there is no longer the possibility of giving praise to God. It is only those who are alive and well who can sing God’s praises.

We believe that, if we die in communion with God, he will take us to himself and we will live in unspeakable happiness with him forever. How foolish of us, then, to act sinfully instead of spending our lives in the praise and service of God! But there is still time for us to turn away from the wrongs we do and to experience the compassion and the forgiveness of God, which is waiting there for us. Only then can we give God the praise which is his due. We cannot praise God and at the same time act in ways which are contrary to his wishes for us.

Now is the time to give praise to God when we have the opportunity.

Mark 10:17-27

Today we have the story of a rich man, that is, a man who believed he was rich or who believed that in his material wealth was his happiness. He was a well-meaning man.”Good Teacher, what must I do to share in everlasting life?” “You know the commandments,” says Jesus and then proceeds to list only those commandments which involve our relations with others, omitting those relating directly to God:

not killing; not committing adultery; not stealing; not bearing false witness; not defrauding; respecting parents.

“I have kept all these things since I was young,” says the man. He was indeed a good man insofar as he did respect his parents and he did not do any of the sinful things mentioned. Jesus looked at the man with a real love. This is not a love of affection or attraction. It is the love of agape, a love which desires the best possible thing for the other. This man was good but Jesus wanted him to be even better. So he said to him: “But there is one more thing: go and sell all you have and give to the poor. After that come and follow me.”

On hearing this, the man’s face clouded over. He walked slowly away full of sadness because he was very rich. Jesus had asked him for the one thing he could not give up.

Had asked for the one thing which showed he was blessed by God. He had not expected this. After he had gone Jesus looked at his disciples and said: “”How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God!” Now it was his disciples’ turn to be alarmed and shocked.

Their whole tradition believed that wealth was a clear sign of God’s blessings; poverty was a curse from God.

Jesus removes any misunderstanding on their part: “It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of God.” In other words, quite impossible. This was really too much for them.”In that case,” they asked each other, “who can be saved?” If those who have done well in this life cannot be saved what hope can there be for the losers? It would take them time to learn the truth of Jesus’ words. And it is a lesson that many of us Christians still have to learn.

Why is it so difficult for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of God? The answer depends on what meaning we give to ‘rich’ and to ‘Kingdom of God’. A person at a lower middle class level in Europe or the United States may be extremely wealthy with the same resources if living in some African or Asian countries. Similarly a ‘rich’ peasant in a remote village may live a life that is primitive compared to a family on welfare in Europe. When Jesus uses the word ‘rich’ he means a person who has more, a lot more, than those around him while many of those around him do not have enough for their basic needs. For a person to cling to their material goods in such a situation, to enjoy a relatively luxurious standard of living while those around are deficient in food and housing is in contradiction to everything that Jesus and the Kingdom stand for.

The Kingdom of God here is not referring to a future life in ‘heaven’. Jesus is not saying that a rich person cannot go to heaven. He is concerned with how the rich person is living now. The Kingdom is a situation, a set of relationships where truth and integrity, love and compassion and justice and the sharing of goods prevail. The man in the story said that he kept the commandments. One should notice that, except for one, all are expressed negatively. The man could observe several of them by doing nothing! Jesus was asking him to do something very positive, namely, to share his prosperity with his brothers and sisters in need. That he was not prepared to do. As such, he was not ready for the kingdom. He could not be a follower of Jesus. Nor can anyone else who is in a similar situation.

We might also add that the teaching applies not only to individuals but to communities and even nations. There are countries in the world today enjoying very high levels of prosperity with all kinds of consumer luxuries available while a very large proportion of the rest of the world lives mired in poverty, hunger, disease. It is one of the major scandals of our day. This is not a Kingdom situation and much of it is caused not by an uncaring God, or natural causes but by human beings who just refuse to share their surplus wealth. As someone has said, the really rich are those whose needs are the least. A final reflection. We may feel that, in our society, we personally could by no stretch of the imagination be called rich and so the story does not apply to us. But we can cling to other things besides money. I might profitably ask myself today if there is anything at all in my life which I would find it very difficult to give up if God asked it of me. It might be a relationship, it might be a job or position, it might be good health.

To be a disciple Jesus means that he is asking me to follow him unconditionally, without any strings, ready to let go of anything and everything (although he may not actually ask me to do so). It is the readiness that counts. The man in the story did not even seem to have that.

Can a Catholic be a millionaire? What do you think? What do you think Jesus’ answer would be?

Week 8 | Tuesday

Sirach 35:1-12

Today’s reading has a message which is relevant for all Christians. The teaching is that there should never be a division between our worship in church and the way we lead our daily lives. Each one is meant to reinforce the other. The author, Ben Sirach, is both a firm supporter of liturgical worship and at the same time emphasises the observance of the Law, especially in matters of justice and charity. He brings them together in this reading. To live a deeply moral life is in itself a form of worship. But formal worship is also important for him.

He begins by saying that one who observes the Law is already making many offerings. Following the teaching of Jesus, we Christians believe that true love and service of brothers and sisters, especially those in need, is to worship God really present in each one.

As examples, he says that to return a kindness is like making an offering of the choicest flour to the Temple. To give alms is equivalent to making a thanks offering. To abstain from moral wrongdoing is to make an act pleasing to God and to give up sinful ways is the equivalent of making atonement. (The Day of Atonement was the greatest day in the liturgical calendar of the Jews.)

“Do not appear before the Lord empty-handed.” To “appear before the Lord” means to approach the temple with offerings. And to come empty-handed here does not mean coming without sacrificial offerings but without a record of good behaviour and acts of kindness and help to those in need. Again, we remember Jesus’ teaching that, if we remember that someone has been hurt by us in some way, we need to bring them healing and reconciliation, before we go to make our sacrificial offering. There is an intimate relation between what is offered in the temple and the kind of person one is who is making the offering.

“The offering of the righteous enriches the altar / and its pleasing odour rises before the Most High.” The offering of fruits or animals become greatly enhanced when the one offering is someone living a life truly in harmony with God’s will as given to us in the teaching of Jesus.

“The sacrifice of the righteous is acceptable, and it will never be forgotten.” It is the lifestyle of the one offering which gives the offering its real value before God.

As Christians, we need to take this reading to heart. We sometimes describe a daily communicant as a “good” Catholic. But we also do not see what we call the “Sunday” Catholic as an ideal.”Going to Mass” must be much more than the mere observance of a commandment.

On the one hand, the way of life offered to us in the Gospel must be the basis for our everyday living and influence all our words, actions and relationships. Our Sunday worship, if it is properly celebrated, is intimately connected with our to living a Gospel-centred life while a Gospel-centred life will have a lot to bring to the celebration of the Eucharist. Perhaps it is here we find one of the inherent weaknesses of our Christian life in these times.

Mark 28-31

Having overcome their initial shock at what Jesus had to say about the danger of wealth as a serious obstacle to being a follower of Jesus or being a member of the Kingdom, his disciples begin to take stock of their own actual situation. Clearly they cannot even be remotely numbered among the wealthy. Is there something to be said in favour of their relative poverty? “What about us?” asks the ever-irrepressible Peter.”We have left everything and followed you.”

Indeed they had. At the beginning of Mark’s gospel we are told that, on Jesus’ invitation, they had abandoned their whole livelihood and become followers of Jesus. It was a bold step when they really had no idea where it would lead them.

Jesus replies: “There is no one who has left house, brothers, sisters, father, children or land for my sake and for the sake of the Gospel who will not be repaid a hundred times over, houses, brothers, sisters, mothers, children and land – not without persecutions – now in this present time and, in the world to come, eternal life. Many who are first will be last, and the last first.”

This sounds like a pie-in-the-sky promise but has it been fulfilled? In fact, it has been – and many times over. By leaving a world where each one scrambles for a piece of the cake and where some get a huge piece and others only get crumbs, the Christian who truly has the spirit of the Gospel enters a community wherever everyone takes care of everyone else and where each one’s needs are taken care of by a sharing of the community’s resources.

This is how by leaving one’s home and family and giving away one’s material goods one enters a new family in which there are far more mothers, brothers, sisters; where one home is replaced by many homes offering their warmth and hospitality, offering a home from home.

This is a reality which, unfortunately, has not been realised among many Christians who live their daily lives in the rat race for acquisition characteristic of our modern capitalist societies and who believe that what they cannot get by their own efforts they will never come to enjoy.

Yet there are examples. One of the most obvious is religious life where the words of Jesus are lived out. The question is why should only religious have this experience of shared love and shared material goods? There are other communities like L’Arche, founded by Jean Vanier – a saint of our time, where the fit and the handicapped share a life together. There are basic Christian communities or some charismatic groups where families live in a communal style sharing all their resources.

But, by and large, we have to a great extent failed to realise that Christianity is not meant to be a religion where individuals, rich and poor, live individualistic lives and carry out certain ‘religious’ acts to “save their own souls” but that it essentially consists of creating a whole new way by which people relate to each other in mutual love and care. Jesus says that in his world the first will be last and the last first. In fact, he is saying that in his world there is no first and no last. Perhaps this can be illustrated by a story:

A rich man was concerned about his future salvation, would he ‘go to heaven’ or not. In order to motivate him, he asked God to be given a preview of heaven and hell. God agreed. God said that they would first pay a visit to hell. When they got there the man was greatly surprised. He was brought into a sumptuous dining room of a large Chinese restaurant all decorated in red and gold. In the centre was a large round table and on it were the most exotic and delicious dishes one could imagine. Around the table were seated the diners. They were the most miserable-looking group one could imagine, all sitting there motionless and in silence just looking at the beautiful food in front of them. The reason for their glumness was that they had been given chopsticks which were three feet long! There was no way they could get any of the food into their mouths. And they were going to sit there like that for eternity. That was hell!

God then brought the man to heaven. Again he was amazed. Because they were in an identical Chinese banqueting room, with the same kind of table and the same wonderful food. But everybody was in the highest spirits. The sound of laughter rang out everywhere. They were really enjoying themselves and the meal. Was this because they had the normal length of chopsticks? No! They also had three-foot chopsticks but here everyone was reaching out food to people on the opposite side of the table. And that was heaven.

It is a very good illustration of today’s Gospel. When everyone serves, everyone is served. When everyone gives, everyone gets. It is a lesson even we Christians seem to find difficult to learn.

Week 8 | Wednesday

Sirach 36:1,5-6,10-17

The reading is part of a beautiful prayer of God’s people. It reveals the sentiments of pious Jews about the year 190 BC, just before the Maccabaean revolt.

It is a prayer for the deliverance of Jerusalem and the people of Israel from foreign oppression. Such a prayer comes as a surprise within a book of wisdom and brings to expression political judgements and hopes that are extremely veiled elsewhere in Sirach. In form it draws upon the Psalms and shares many features with prayers and poems found in somewhat later apocalyptic literature.

– Harper-Collins Study Bible

Expressing his faith in God as the Supreme Power in the universe, Ben Sira begs God to continue showing forth his holiness and mercy through his people Israel, and his power and justice by punishing the nations, especially those who bring such great suffering on his people, so that the nations will come recognise the God of Israel as the only true and all-powerful God.

It reflects the difficult times his people are having during the period after their return from exile, times of oppression from invading and godless outsiders. There is a plea for a return of the glorious times of old, for the restoration of the temple, for a fulfilment of the many prophecies made in the past.”Thus it will be known to the very ends of the earth that you are the eternal God.”

The prayer begins with a plea for God’s mercy and that all the nations (especially those persecuting Israel) become filled with awe for God’s power.

Only then will they realise, as his People do, that their God is the only true God. They ask God that he give new signs and work wonders to reveal his power and glory. The allusion here is to the wonderful things that happened to God’s people when they were liberated from slavery in Egypt and made their 40-year trek under his protection to the Promised Land.

They ask that the tribes of Jacob, the 12 tribes that make up the Israelite people, have their inheritance restored as it was at the beginning. That inheritance was the land promised by God to the descendants of Abraham. The sense of coming together again as one people, what was called the “ingathering”, which was particularly strong during the Exile, remained a characteristic of Judaism long after the exiles had returned home. The Jews always regarded their dispersion abroad as a passing and unfortunate phase, to which the coming of the Messiah would put an end. And, undoubtedly, is what motivates many people in Israel today.

“Vindicate those whom you have created first.” The author may mean Israel as a whole (his “first-born”), or he may be referring to the patriarchs, who according to an ancient midrash were among the seven things created before the world, or else created Wisdom, the first-fruit of creation (Prov 8:22). Or perhaps he believes that the Messiah or the messianic Kingdom, “created before all things”, is shortly to appear on earth.

There is a special prayer for Jerusalem, the place where God dwells in his holy Temple. It has been desecrated again and again by the enemies of God’s people. May Zion, that is, Jerusalem be once again filled with song in praise of Yahweh and his sanctuary in the Temple filled with his glory.

They ask God to give witness to the People he created from the beginning, with Abraham as their ancestor and carry out all the promises which had been made in his name. May all those who wait for the Lord receive the reward which belongs to them and may the word of the prophets be fulfilled. This petition is an early example of the idea that the prophecies of the prophets in general referred to a divine liberation of Jerusalem yet to be accomplished. It is a theme which became more common in later literature and is found in Mark’s gospel.

Finally, there is a plea that their prayer be heard, “in accordance with Aaron’s blessings on your people”, so that peoples everywhere may recognise that Yahweh is the one God and everlasting Lord.

There will be times in our lives, times when things are not going well, times when we feel that people are being very unfair to us that we will feel like making such a prayer. But we need also to realise that, no matter what situation we may find ourselves in, God, our Emmanuel, is there with us and among us.

Mark 10:32-45

We now come to the third and final foretelling of his passion, death and resurrection by Jesus. It is not insignificant that it follows immediately on the story of the rich man and the teaching of Jesus that goes with it. We are now going to see what discipleship of Jesus really means.

“They were on the road, going up to Jerusalem.” A statement of fact but pregnant with meaning. They were on the road, not just any road, but THE road and that road goes to Jerusalem and points to all that Jerusalem will mean for Jesus and his followers. Jesus is the Road, the Way and his way brings him to Jerusalem, the carrying of his cross, the letting go of his life in love of his Father and us, leading to the final triumph. Those who wish to be his disciples have to be ready to walk that road with him.

The disciples have not quite reached this stage of discipleship yet. As Jesus steps out firmly on the road to Jerusalem, his disciples straggle behind. They were “in a daze and those who followed him were apprehensive”. As far as they were concerned, Jesus was out of his mind. To go to Jerusalem at this time was asking for trouble, serious trouble. Everyone knew the Jewish leadership was out to get Jesus. Jerusalem was the last place to go.

Jesus shows them he is under no illusion about the situation. He gives them a detailed description of what is going to happen to him, more detailed than in the previous foretellings. The key term “handed over” is used again and, for the first time, a handing over to the “Gentiles” is mentioned. Condemnation to death will come from the leaders of his people but the carrying out of the execution will be the work of the Romans. It was not just the Jews who were responsible for Jesus’ death; we all were in the person of the Roman Gentiles.

Nevertheless, earlier on the disciples had acknowledged Jesus as the Messiah and Saviour-King of Israel. In the second prediction they had revealed an awareness that what Jesus was predicting was going to happen and so debated who his successor might be. Now, for the first time, the last part of the prediction – rising after three days – seems to be getting through.

Perhaps it was in that frame of mind that Jesus is approached by two of his closest disciples, James and John. However, it is also clear that they showed little understanding of all that Jesus had taught them so far. They approached him gingerly: “Master, we want you to do us a favour.” Replies Jesus: “What is it you want me to do for you?” (We will deal with this question again in tomorrow’s reading.)

The answer of the two brothers indicates how little they have understood of the mind of Jesus: “Allow us to sit one at your right hand and the other at your left in your glory. (After all, you did say three times that you were going to rise again after your death.)”This is a perfect example of what the Chinese call guanxi, using a personal acquaintance or relationship to get in by the back door and obtain a favour otherwise out of reach. And by “glory” they are almost certainly thinking in worldly terms of Jesus as an earthly, victorious, all conquering king. The kind of person they expected the Messiah to be.

“You do not know what you are asking,” Jesus tells them. They neither know the kind of King Jesus is going to be nor do they know the price he is going to pay to enter that kingship. This is clear from the next question he puts to them: “Can you drink the cup that I must drink, or be baptised with which I must be baptised?” This is a clear reference to Jesus’ passion and death, the price he will pay to reveal God’s love for his children. We remember, later in the garden, as the weight of his coming passion presses him down, Jesus prays that the cup be taken away.”Baptism” implies a total immersion and Jesus will be totally overwhelmed with suffering and shame and humiliation.

Do the two disciples realise this? Are they ready to go through this with Jesus on their way to the privileges and glory they are asking for? “We can,” they confidently boast without realising just what is involved. In fact, with the rest of their companions they will scatter and disappear when these events overtake their Master.

Nevertheless, looking further ahead Jesus generously tells them that they will indeed one day share Jesus’ cup and his baptism of suffering and death. James would be one of the first martyrs of the young church. However, as to giving them the places of honour they were looking for, that was beyond Jesus’ power to give.”They belong to those to whom they have been allotted.” In other words, these places are not just for the asking; they have to be earned. They will be given, not to those who furtively ask, but to those whose love most closely approaches that of Jesus himself.

Not surprisingly, the other ten were highly indignant when they found out what James and John had done behind their back. They were not indignant at the impropriety or the daring but that they had been taken advantage of. They wanted exactly the same things themselves.

Following the same pattern as the other previous incidents, the prediction of the Passion and Resurrection is followed by a show of misunderstanding by the disciples, leading to a teaching. And that is what comes now.

Jesus patiently gives them another lesson on what real greatness in his Kingdom consists of. In the “world” to be great is to have power over others, to exercise authority, to be able to control and manipulate people to be at your disposal, to use people to attain your ends. In Jesus’ world those are really great who put themselves and their unique gifts to promote the well-being of brothers and sisters, especially those in most need. And the more people we can serve the greater we are. ‘Authority’ is not to control but to empower. And it is the role of anyone in authority to generate ideas, energy, creativity in those for whom one is responsible. In other words to

serve those who have been entrusted to one’s authority. But it is a corruption of the word to become ‘authoritarian’ in such a position. After 2,000 years of Christianity it is a lesson practically all of us have yet to learn.

Week 8 | Thursday

Sirach 42:15-25

 In a majestic passage Sirach speaks of the glory of God manifested in the beauty and marvels of his creation. It is the product of God’s word, his creative, life-giving word. Creation becomes an expression of God’s very being, reflecting his truth, his goodness, and beauty and God has total insight into all that takes place in his creation.”Not a thought escapes him, not a single word is hidden from him.”

The author begins by expressing his intention to speak of “the works of the Lord”.

Everything that exists has come into being by the “word of the Lord” and every creatures is subject to his will. This is one of the first mentions of the creative “Word” of God. In Wisdom literature generally, it is Wisdom that is spoken of as creative.

The sun fills the whole world with its light, reflecting in a small way the glory of God which permeates the whole of creation. Not even “his holy ones” can adequately express all that God accomplishes throughout the universe, which remains a constant and pale reflection of his glory. The “holy ones” here are the angels, who live always in the presence of God.

At the same time, our all-knowing, all-creating God can penetrate the innermost recesses of the human heart, however devious it may be.

“He knows all the knowledge there is, and has observed the signs of the times.” The heavenly bodies are the ‘signs of the times’, not only because they mark the seasons but also because, according to a widespread belief, the future was already written in the heavens. There may also be a more specific reference to the extraordinary signs expected to announce the coming of the Messiah (Matt 24:29-31). In our own day, many still, with varying degrees of seriousness, look to the stars as an indication of what is in store for them.

So there is nothing which can be hidden from God’s knowledge. The future, too, is known to him from all eternity. He reveals what has been and what has yet to be. Not a single thought escapes him, nor can anything remain hidden from him.

The fruits of his wisdom can be seen everywhere and he remains unchanging from all eternity. There is nothing that can be given to him which he does not already have nor can anything be taken away from him. He needs no one to give him advice on how he should act.

“How desirable are all his works and how dazzling to the eye.” Down the ages, the beauty of our world has never ceased to mesmerise artists of all kinds – poets, painters and musicians. This beauty is something which will endure in one form or other as long as our created world exists, while, at the same time, each created thing has been brought into being to meet a particular need determined by him.

Finally, says the author, all things come in complementary pairs to give a sense of completeness. Each one supplements the virtues of the other. This is true not only of humans but of practically all living things where they are ‘male’ and ‘female’.

Given such a world, how can we ever tire of being carried away by the glory and beauty of its Maker? 

Sirach 5:1-8

The passage speaks of our attitudes to wealth, power and false confidence and consists of a number of distinct pieces of advice on how we should behave. It comes from the first part of a 22-line poetic arrangement of warnings on the disastrous consequences of false presumptions, wrong speech and shameful behaviour. It is particularly directed against the evils of the rich which tend to pride and a sense of independence, presumption, false security and no regrets for what they do. They are playing a very dangerous game.

“Do not give your heart to your money or say, ‘With this I have enough’.” There are some who believe that with wealth they can get or have anything, that wealth will give them power to control and manipulate others. Money alone is never enough. Having money has little to do with wisdom or happiness.

“Do not be led by your appetites and energy to follow the passions of your heart.” The passions of our heart can lead us very far astray and bring about our own self-destruction. Pleasure and happiness are two very different things.

“Do not say, ‘Who has authority over me?’, for the Lord will surely punish you.” Wealth can give one a sense of total self-sufficiency, a belief that with money one can get anything one wants, and that one is answerable to no one. And yet, the rich person is, in many respects, just as vulnerable as one who is materially destitute. A tiny blood clot in the wrong place can bring a sudden end to everything. The ultimate life decisions are never ours.

“Do not say, ‘I have sinned and what happened to me?’, for the Lord is slow to anger.” One may be very aware of leading a life which is immoral and unjust but nothing bad has happened so one keeps acting immorally. That is because “the Lord is slow to anger”. This phrase comes from the time the Israelites rebelled against God at Mount Sinai. But instead of punishing them Yahweh gave them a second chance and told them: “The Lord, the Lord, a merciful and gracious God, slow to anger and rich in kindness and fidelity, continuing his kindness for a thousand generations and forgiving wickedness and crime and sin” (Exod 34:6-7). God’s bias is towards forgiveness and mercy but there is a limit. In the end, sin and immorality will have to be paid for. The unrepentant wrongdoers put themselves outside God’s mercy.

“Do not be so confident of forgiveness that you add sin to sin.” This is similar to the previous injunction. We can be sure of God’s forgiveness when we repent but it never justifies our deliberately continuing to act in ways that are evil and immoral, like someone who says he will continue his sinful life but will make a “good confession” at the end. Once aware of behaving in ways that are in disharmony with the Way shown to us by Jesus, we must abandon such behaviour now.

“Do not say, ‘His mercy is great, he will forgive the multitude of my sins’, for both mercy and wrath are with him and his anger will rest on sinners.” Another similar warning. Yes, God’s mercy is great and his forgiveness is always there for us but, as long as we are turned away from him, we close the door on that mercy and forgiveness. The Prodigal Son could only be reconciled when he “came to his senses” and turned back to his Father.

“Do not delay to turn back to the Lord and do not postpone it from day to day, for suddenly the Lord’s wrath will blaze out and at the time of punishment you will perish.” Repentance must follow immediately on our awareness of going the wrong way. If God comes for us and we are facing in the wrong direction, knowingly doing what we know to be very wrong, we may hear those terrible words, “I do not know you.” (Matt 25:12). And, of course, we do not know when he will come for us. As we know, it can happen very suddenly and to anyone.

Finally, “Do not set your heart on ill-gotten gains; they will be of no use to you on the day of disaster.” Immorally acquired wealth may get us far in the world of business and the world of expensive indulgence but it will do nothing for us on the day we hear the final call. We remember Jesus’ parable about the rich fool, who felt so rich that he could put his feet up and have a long life of enjoyment ahead of him. How wrong he was! (Luke 12:13-21). All that matters is here and now to find and recognise and serve Jesus in every other person but especially those in need of any kind.

Mark 10:46-52

At a first reading this is simply another pleasant story about Jesus healing a blind man. However, as we shall see, there is much more here than meets the eye. Although Mark’s gospel is the one which gives most details when telling a story, leading people to speak of his using the memories of an eyewitness (perhaps Peter), there is a lot more symbolism in his stories than at first seems apparent.

First of all, this story is strategically placed. It comes at the end of a long portion of the gospel beginning with the healing of a deaf man (8:31-37). This section includes the high point at the middle of the gospel where the disciples recognise Jesus as Messiah and Lord and also the three predictions of his passion, death and resurrection and the accompanying teachings. In between are several other episodes and teachings. Through it all we see the disciples stumbling along in various degrees of misunderstanding as they accompany their Master. Today’s story brings all this to an end and, in a way, can be seen as a summing up of all that has gone before. Immediately after this, the final phase of the gospel begins with Jesus in Jerusalem for the last time.

We find Jesus and his disciples in Jericho, which lies just north of Jerusalem. They are journeying south on their way from Galilee. We saw yesterday how alarmed they were about Jesus’ determination to head for a place so full of danger for him (and them). As Jesus was leaving the city, accompanied by his disciples and a large crowd of people, there was a blind beggar called Bar Timaeus (son of Timaeus) sitting beside the road. Already we have a sentence full of symbolism here, some of which we will discuss further on.

Jesus is not just leaving the city; he is on the first stage of the final and climactic period of his mission on earth. He is heading for Jerusalem. Although he is surrounded by a large number of people, most of them are with him only physically but not in spirit, as we shall soon see.

When the blind man hears all the commotion he naturally wants to know what is going on and is told that Jesus of Nazareth is passing by. Immediately on hearing this he calls out, “Jesus, son of David, have mercy on me!” It is a form of what we now call the “Jesus Prayer”. A prayer we need to make constantly; a prayer we can only make sincerely

when we are truly aware and accepting of our dependence on Jesus’ help and guidance, when we fully acknowledge the distance that exists between what we are and what Jesus is calling us to be.

In making such a prayer, the blind man is opening himself up to all that Jesus can and wants to give him. However, the surrounding crowd, smug in their (physical) closeness to Jesus and contemptuous of an irritating beggar, try to silence him. How often people have given up their approach to Jesus because of discouragements they have met! How often have we, perhaps, been a source of discouragement or scandal to people who were tentatively looking for Jesus and the meaningful life he can open up for us?

This man, however, is not discouraged. The more he is scolded by the crowd, the louder he shouts. Jesus has told us to ask, not once, but many times. This the man does. Then Jesus stops. If the man had not called, Jesus might not have stopped. He would simply have continued on his journey. Jesus constantly passes through our lives. Every single day. How often have we failed to recognise his presence? How often have we failed to call him? And perhaps he has passed on and out of our day.

“Call him over,” Jesus tells those around him. Notice that Jesus does not call the man himself. He tells others to call him. Again that is something that is the norm in our lives.

If we believe that Jesus has appeared to us in a vision and directly called us, either we are ready for canonisation or, more likely, for a mental home! No, it is through others that we are constantly being called. In fact, we might reflect today on the huge number of people who have directly or indirectly brought Christ into our lives. It is because of them that we are what we are now. Without them, we would not know Jesus or the Gospel or the Church.

Notice, too, the fickleness of the crowd. Those who were just now scolding the man are now urging him to approach Jesus.”Courage, do not be afraid; he is calling you.” How many people need to hear those words! And how often they never do! Yes, there is no need ever to be afraid of Jesus, our Good Shepherd. And he is calling everyone of us, in some way or other. But perhaps many have never heard the call, because Jesus expected me to do the calling. But I was too absorbed in myself to do so.

“Get up!” they tell the man. Yes, he is being told to rise, the same verb that describes the rising of Jesus from the dead. He is not just being told to get on his feet but to enter a whole new way of living. He throws off his cloak, which presumably was all he was wearing, and comes to Jesus. He comes to Jesus encumbered with absolutely nothing. It is also reminiscent of the disciples leaving their boats, their nets and their family to follow Jesus. It is reminiscent of the early Christians stripping themselves of all their clothes, symbolic of their sinful past, as they go down into the baptismal pool. When we approach Jesus, we need divest ourselves of everything, get rid of everything we tend to cling to. (Remember the story of the ‘rich’ man earlier this week?)

Jesus now asks him: “What do you want me to do for you?” Isn’t this a wonderful thing to hear from Jesus? But he is asking the very same question of us every day. We often tend to ask what Jesus wants us to do for him but he is also asking us what he can do for us. And when he asks you that question today – as he will – what answer are you going to give him? What you say is going to reveal a great deal about you and your priorities in life.

In a sense, of course, Jesus does not need to know the answer to your question, but you do. And the answer comes from the asking. And have you noticed any changes in the way you would answer the question over the years? And what would today’s answer be?

By the way, did we not hear Jesus asking the same question before? Yes indeed. In yesterday’s Gospel when James and John came asking for a favour, Jesus asked them, “What do you want me to do for you?”

Compare now the two answers. The disciples asked for a privilege, for positions of status and authority and power, to be one up over others. What did the blind man ask for? “Rabbuni, that I may see again.” Of course, in our present context he is not just asking for physical sight. He is looking for something much more important; he is looking for IN-sight, the ability to see into the meaning of life and its direction and its ultimate values.

In answer to the question that Jesus is asking us, we could hardly make a better response: “Lord, that I may SEE again.” When we truly see with our inner eye, it changes our whole way of looking at the world and our behaviour changes accordingly. We cannot ask for anything more crucial in life. Perhaps we feel all along that we have been able to see both literally and figuratively. But today we are asking to see again, to have a deeper vision that goes much further into the ultimate meaning of our lives.

Fr Tony de Mello speaks of this in his last book. He calls it Awareness, being wide awake and living with your eyes open. No wonder Jesus responds generously to the man’s request: “Go; your faith, your deep trust in me, has saved you.” “Saved”, that is, restored him to complete wholeness. Only a person with perfect sight (in the sense we have discussed) is truly whole. Only such a person knows where to go and how to get there.

And what happens then? The beggar receives the sight he asked for (“Ask, and you shall receive”) and what does he do? He does the only thing that a person with true vision can do – he follows Jesus on the road, that Road, that Way to Jerusalem and all that it means. He becomes unconditionally a disciple.

Going back now to the beginning of the story we were told that Bar Timaeus, a blind beggar was sitting by the road. This description is one that fits every person who discovers Jesus. We are, without Jesus, blind, we cannot see clearly although we may be very clever and highly educated. But, if we cannot see what Jesus sees, we are sightless, blind. And we are beggars. We can only truly come to Christ when we realise that, whatever intellectual, social or material endowments we may have, we are basically poor. That was the problem of the rich man who came to Jesus. In his monetary wealth, he was not aware of his radical poverty. We have nothing that is really ours.

Thirdly, the man was sitting beside the road, not on it. And this indeed is the lot of everyone who sits beside the road, to be blind and a beggar in need. The road, as we have said, in the Gospel story is a symbol of the Way that is Christ. It is where there is Truth and Life. And so at the end of the story, the man having made his compact with Jesus, is now able to see, is no longer a beggar, and is accompanying Jesus on the road.

This story has meanings going far beyond a mere miracle story. It is a beautiful summing up of how Jesus’ disciples learnt to see and walk with him along the Way. It is a Gospel in miniature, a vignette of the spiritually deprived person discovering where Truth and Life are and committing oneself to it totally.

Week 8 | Friday

Sirach 6:5-17

Sirach today gives some advice on friendship. He has some wise things to say.

Friendship was an important concept in social relations during the Hellenistic period and is referred to several times in Sirach (9:10; 11:29-14:2; 22:19-26; 37:1-6). In Greek literature of the time, a friend was one who remained true in times of distress and could therefore be trusted with one’s official or private interests and affairs. Today’s reading brings to an end a section of instructions and admonitions which test one’s resolve, integrity, and capacity for making judgements in keeping with wisdom piety. (Harper-Collins Study Bible, edited)

True friends are discerned not by how much money they have but whether they will continue to stand by one in times of difficulty and misfortune. Such friends are rare and their value is beyond estimation.

The word ‘friend’ is one we tend to use very casually and we call people friends with whom we have only a relatively superficial acquaintance. Or we term as friends people who are useful in getting things we want. A genuine friend, with whom one can open oneself completely and in whom can have total trust, is not easy to find.

Some of the points made today are worth considering:

- Friends are won by our speaking kindly and being courteous to people. Why do some people seem to have lots of close friends and others have very few? Perhaps one of the main reasons is here. To find a friend one has first to be a friend.

- People with whom you are friendly can be many but a close adviser and confidant will be “one in a thousand”. As we said, the word ‘friend’ can be used very loosely. It is genuine friendship that we are speaking of here.

- “Take them on trial and be in no hurry to trust them.” True friendships, which are based on genuine love, take time to develop. Mutual attraction is not enough.

- Sirach gives a few examples of what we would now call “fair-weather” friends:

“One kind of friend is only so when it suits him but will not stand by you in your day of trouble…

“Another kind of friend will fall out with you and to your dismay make your quarrel public (one thinks of bitter divorce proceedings)…

“A third kind of friend will share your table but not stand by you in your day of trouble;

when you are prosperous, they become your second self and lord it over your servants, but if ever you fall on hard times they will turn against you and will hide themselves from you…” Good examples of genuine friendships are when one spouse is stricken with a serious and long-term illness.

- Sirach advises us to keep clear of those who are hostile to us (but we also have to remember the Gospel injunction to pray for them and be ready to forgive them and be reconciled with them)…

but at the same time to “be wary of your friends”, that is, those who call themselves friends but who, in time of stress, are likely to ditch you…

Finally, Sirach speaks of the true friend, a treasure more valuable than anything money can buy:

“A faithful friend is a sure shelter, whoever finds one has found a rare treasure. A faithful friend is something beyond price, there is no measuring their worth. A faithful friend is like life-saving medicine, the elixir of life, and those who fear the Lord will find one.” True friendship is based on love and, where there is love, God is inevitably present, for God is love.

Finally, an astute piece of advice:

“Whoever fears the Lord makes true friends, for as people are, so are their friends.” This last phrase may mean “one’s friends are as dear to one as oneself” but also “one’s friend will inevitably be, like oneself, a God-fearing person”.

When we live in truth and integrity, we live in God; and we are likely to make friends whose lives are also based on truth and integrity. There can really be no other kind of true friend.

Probably, the greatest tragedy in life is never to have had really close and intimate friends. The sign of a true friend is the emptiness that comes on permanent separation because of death or some other irreversible reason.

Mark 11:11-26

We are now entering the final part of Mark’s gospel. Jesus is now in Jerusalem and in the final days of his ministry. Today we have the strange incident of the fig tree. Jesus was leaving Bethany for nearby Jerusalem and was hungry. He went up to a fig tree looking for fruit to eat even though it was not the time of year for figs. Jesus then cursed the tree: “Never again shall anyone eat of your fruit!” Why curse a tree for not having what it could not have at that time?

In the evening on their way back to Bethany, the disciples saw the fig tree that Jesus had cursed all withered.

This story is generally understood as a kind of parable. The fig tree without fruit represents those people among the Jews who rejected Jesus. When he came to them looking for faith in his message, he found nothing. In a sense, they had closed their minds and withered up.

This meaning is reinforced by another event which is sandwiched into the middle of the fig tree story. This is a common device used by Mark and it is called ‘inclusion’, when one passage is enclosed within another. (We remember the story of the woman with the haemorrhage which is included within the story of the raising of Jairus’ daughter.)

After cursing the fig tree Jesus went to the Temple in Jerusalem and began driving out all those who were trading in the Temple court. He accused them of turning God’s house of prayer into a market place. It was an example of people who had reduced their religious faith to mere commercialism. Religious ritual had been turned into an opportunity for making money. The meaning of the Temple as the symbol of God’s presence among his people was being lost. And there was also the failure to see the presence and power of God working through Jesus himself. The fig tree was adorned with beautiful leaves but there was no fruit.

And so at the end Jesus urges his disciples to develop real faith, a real trust and insight into God’s presence in their lives. To those with true faith, Jesus says, just anything is possible. It is an essential condition for prayer. And prayer must include a willingness to forgive and be reconciled with those who cause us difficulties so that we may find forgiveness and reconciliation from God for our own faults and failings in his service.

Let us pray today for that kind of faith. A faith that produces much fruit.

Week 8 | Saturday

Sirach 17:1-15

Sirach today speaks of the relationship between the Creator and the human beings he has made. It is part of a poem in praise of the Lord for the creation of humankind. The author is following the order of Genesis and has already spoken of the creation of stars, plants and animals.

He combines in one the two accounts of the creation of humankind (Gen 1:26-27; 2:7) and interprets the image of God in humans under the headings of authority, strength, and dominion, thus developing a hierarchy of power: God, humans, living beings.

Humans were created by God from the earth, and will at the end return to earth. The First Man had been created a living thing from the earth and at the end is buried and returns to where he came from.

Human life on earth is temporary, but humans were given authority over all other creatures on earth.

For God gave humans a special strength and made them to be in his own image: sharing his ability to know and love and share his vision of creation.

Because of this, we were put in charge over all beasts and flying things and God “filled all things with dread of humans”. A generally true statement but there are exceptions where the human is the one who fears.

God shaped for humans a mouth and tongue, eyes and ears, and gave them a heart to think with. The Israelites believed that the heart was the seat of reason rather than the seat of the emotions, as it is for us. The list of faculties for perception is similar to that common to the Stoic tradition. The ‘five faculties’ were sight, touch, smell, hearing and taste.

The human was also filled with knowledge and understanding and given a sense of good and evil. In this way, God’s light was planted in human thinking so that we could appreciate, as other creatures cannot, the magnificence of God’s creation.

In addition to the faculty of knowledge, God also taught us. He endowed us with “the law of life”. This refers to the Law of Moses, which is included in the endowments that God “allotted” to mankind. The gifts of Creation and of Mount Sinai are here telescoped into one act of God.

“Their eyes saw his glorious majesty,

Their ears heard the glory of his voice.”

A reference to the Israelites’ experience at Mount Sinai.

For us, of course, there is the further teaching that we have received through the Incarnate Son of God and a new “law of life”.”I have come that they may have life, life in greater abundance” (John 10:10).

Our response to all these gifts will be to “praise his holy name, as we tell of the Lord’s magnificent works”. A very important part of our prayer is to praise and thank the Lord for the beauty and gift of his creation.

At Mount Sinai also, God told his people to beware of all wrongdoing and “he gave each a commandment concerning his neighbour”. He did this through the Ten Commandments and the Mosaic Law. And they needed – as we do – to be aware that “their ways are always under his eye, they cannot be hidden from his sight”.

Let each one of us reflect that we too are part of this creation, we have been given these gifts to develop so that we can continue to grow ever more in the likeness of our God. That is the sole purpose of our existence and we forget it at our peril.

Mark 11:27-33

Jesus is now in Jerusalem. It is the last phase of his public life. Hostility is building up against him. In today’s reading, while walking in the Temple area, he is confronted by a group of Jewish leaders, chief priests, scribes and elders. These are the people who formed the supreme council which will later condemn him to death.

“By what authority are you doing these things?” they ask. The implication is that he is not doing it on their authority which they regard as supreme. In his usual manner, Jesus counters with another question. He asks them if the work of John the Baptist was of human or divine origin.

They immediately realise that answering Jesus’ question raises a serious dilemma. If they were to say John’s baptism was from God, then it could be asked why they did not take part in it (as large numbers of the ordinary people did – and as Jesus himself did). The Gospel describes the leaders as simply coming to observe John as outsiders and judges.

On the other hand if they were to say they considered John’s baptism as merely a human thing, then it would offend all those people who had the highest respect for John and saw in him a prophet of God.

Weakly Jesus’ questioners reply: “We do not know.” A strange and not very convincing reply from the spiritual leaders of the people. Jesus then refuses to answer the question they asked him.

But Jesus’ case was similar to that of John. The people, who had heard Jesus speak (“No man has ever spoken like this”) and saw his cures (“God has visited his people”), had no doubts whatever about the source of Jesus’ authority.”The people were astonished at his teaching, for he taught them as one having authority and not as the Scribes” (Mark 1:22).

The leaders’ own question was a clear indication of their prejudice and wilful blindness in the face of overwhelming evidence.

We too, of course, can have a similar blindness. We can refuse to see the presence and activity of God in situations where we do not want to see it, in people where we do not want to see it. But God can use any person, any experience, good or bad, pleasant or unpleasant, to communicate with us.”Help me, Lord, to seek and find and respond to you in every experience of my life.”

Week 9 | Monday

Tobit 1:1,2; 2:1-9

Today we begin reading the Book of Tobit. It is one of the so-called “deutero-canonical” books, that is, only recognised by the Church as inspired literature after some hesitancy. It is not part of the Hebrew Bible and Protestants place it among the ‘apocrypha’.

It is one of the most delightful stories in the Bible, full of interest and drama. It is a work of fiction with the story based in Niniveh during the time of the Assyrian conquest but written some centuries after the events it claims to describe. It is a domestic story about a man who is devout, law-abiding, charitable but who is struck blind in a freak accident. It is an edifying story in which the emphasis falls on almsgiving and duties towards the dead; true family life is shown at its best and its ideal of marriage anticipates Christian teaching. God’s providential presence is at once revealed and hidden by the appearance of an angel, who acts as his messenger.

The book deals with the perennial problem of why the good suffer but concludes that God’s care is never far away. The author of the book is unknown and the actual date of writing can only be deduced from internal evidence. Dates vary from the 2nd to the 5th century BC and probably originated in the Diaspora, that is, with a Jewish community in exile

Today’s reading begins with Tobit being introduced. ‘Tobit’ is the Greek form of the Hebrew Tobi (“my good”), which may be an abbreviation for Tobiah (“Yahweh is my good”), the name of Tobit’s son (Tobias in Greek). As we shall see, the name is appropriate to the story.

A brief family tree is given and we learn that Tobit came from the tribe of Nephthali, one of Israel’s twelve tribes, descended from the sons of Jacob. The story is taking place during the reign of the Assyrian king, Shalmaneser, father of the famous Sennacherib, the one “who came down like a wolf on the fold”. Tobit, with many other Jews, is living in exile in Niniveh.

We skip reading chapter 1. This is a pity, because it gives very useful information on Tobit’s background and explains what happens in today’s reading. Tobit, although an observant and charitable Jew (unlike many of his kinsmen in exile), had risen very high in the Assyrian court and was very close to the king. But, when the king’s heir, Sennacherib, began persecuting and killing Israelites, Tobit would take the dead bodies and secretly bury them. When someone betrayed him over this, he had to go into hiding and all his property was seized. It was only after Sennacherib was assassinated by his two sons and the new king, Esarhaddon, appointed Ahikar, a nephew of Tobit, as his chief cupbearer that Tobit could return to Niniveh and be restored to his former position.

It is at this point that our reading picks up the story. Tobit has returned to his home and has rejoined his wife, Anna, and his son, Tobias. On the harvest festival of Pentecost he sits down (actually reclines) for a formal dinner of thanksgiving with his family. Pentecost was celebrated fifty days after the Passover (for us, 50 days after Easter). Before the family began to eat and seeing the abundance of food on the table, he tells his son to go out and look for a devout Israelite who is in material need and to bring him back to the house to share the festival meal with them. This is a way of letting us know that Tobit was both religiously very observant and also a person who deeply cared for the poor.

However, when the son returns, he reports that, while he was in the city, he found that one of their people had been murdered and left lying dead in the street. He had been strangled, presumably because he was a Jew.

Without a moment’s hesitation and ignoring the great danger, Tobit left the dinner table, the food still untouched, and brought the dead body back to his house so that it could be buried at sunset. He then washed himself, for he was unclean after touching the dead body, and had his meal, though with feelings of great sadness.

For he was reminded of a passage from Amos in which the prophet says to Israel that their festivals will be turned into occasions of mourning and their songs into laments. That is precisely what has happened on this Pentecost, which was meant to be a time of joyful celebration and thanksgiving. And Tobit weeps.

After sunset, Tobit went and gave the dead man a proper burial. His neighbours thought he was an idiot and mocked him. During Sennacherib’s time, he had been hunted down to be put to death and had gone into hiding for doing precisely this kind of thing. And here he was doing exactly the same thing again. What his neighbours did not realise was that, for Tobit, respect for the dead took precedence even over his own life. It is again an indication of the kind of person he was and how he remained loyal to the requirements of his religious beliefs even in a purely Gentile environment.

His example is clearly directed towards those who would hear his story told, Jews of the Diaspora, living in a Gentile environment where many of them succumbed to the enticements of Gentile ways and forgot the commitments of their Jewish faith.

After he had buried the man, Tobit again had a ritual washing (expected of the observant Jew which he was). He then went into the courtyard of his house for the night. His contact with the dead man meant he could not spend the night inside the house. He lay down to sleep beside the wall. Because of the heat his face was uncovered - and that leads us into tomorrow’s reading.

The passage gives us a clear indication of Tobit’s character - a man of great charity and of courage, a man who deeply cared about his people and was prepared to suffer for them, a man of compassion and integrity. The story manages to show both his concern for the hungry poor and for the unburied dead. It also reveals the courage that often comes to those who have to suffer for their beliefs and for their sense of truth and justice.

Many Christians today live in diaspora conditions similar to the Jews in exile and at times it can be difficult to remain faithful to the call of Jesus in the Gospel. This can be true even in so-called ‘Christian’ countries. At the same time, our concern should not be so much to be worried about keeping rules as belonging to strong witnessing communities which set standards for loving care of those around them.

Mark 12:1-12

This will be our last week of readings from Mark’s gospel. We are now in chapter 12 and fast approaching the climax of Jesus’ life and mission. This chapter is marked by a growing conflict between Jesus and the religious and political leaders of his own people. The chapter begins today with a parable (or, more accurately, allegory) directed towards that leadership. Its meaning was very clear to those who heard it.

It tells the story of a man who planted a vineyard, fitted it out with all that was necessary and then let it out to tenants to cultivate. It is clear that the owner is God, the vineyard is Israel and the tenants the people of Israel. The words of Jesus echo very closely a similar image in a poem by the prophet Isaiah (5:1ff). In Isaiah’s image the vines only produce sour grapes.

In Jesus’ story there are evidently good harvests. The problem arises when the master sends his servants to collect what belongs to him of the harvests. One after the other, the servants are driven away or beaten up or even killed. It is a clear reference to the way that God’s people treated the many prophets which God had sent to them.

In exasperation, the owner decides to send his only son, expecting that they will at least respect him. But no. The tenants argue that by killing the only heir, the vineyard will inevitably become their property. When the son (Jesus) arrives, they seize him, kill him and throw him out of the vineyard (a reference to Jesus being crucified outside the walls of Jerusalem).

What will the owner do now? “He will make an end of the tenants and give the vineyard to others. Have you not read this text of scripture: ‘It was the stone rejected by the builders that became the keystone’?” Jesus is rejected by the leaders and by many (but not all) of his own people. The Gentiles will be invited to take their place and will be more than happy to fill it.

The words quoted from Psalm 118 can apply either to Jesus or the Gentiles. Jesus, the rejected and crucified one, becomes the cornerstone. Or, the despised Gentiles become the recipients of God’s love and grace and the cornerstone of the new Christian communities.

Clearly, this story did nothing to endear Jesus to the leaders. They would have (as foretold by the story they had just heard) seized him but they were afraid of the crowd (also Jews) who stood in awe of Jesus, his words and works.

This is one of these stories where we can be tempted to sit in judgement on those who rejected Jesus. But we are not reading it today for that purpose. Rather we are being asked whether we are listening to the word of God as it comes to us in the various people that God sends into our lives. How much better are we than the Scribes and Pharisees? How often do we rationalise ourselves out of doing what God clearly wants us to do?

What welcome do we give to God’s messengers? Do we even recognise them when they come? Maybe today, now, would be a good time to listen more carefully than we normally do.

Week 9 | Tuesday

Tobit 2:9-14

Yesterday we left Tobit sleeping out in the open under the wall of the courtyard of his house. Because of the heat, his face was uncovered.

As he slept, he did not realise that there were sparrows nesting above him. Their fresh droppings fell into his unprotected eyes and caused a white cataract-like film to form on them.

In spite of all the efforts of doctors (and Tobit as a well-off court official could be sure of the best), the cataracts got worse and he ended up becoming totally blind. This situation lasted for four years and it is presumed that he must have lost his post at court.

An unspoken question here is why such a tragedy should happen to such a good man. Was it pure accident or was it, as in the case of Job, a time of testing for Tobit? This question underlies the whole book.

His family was deeply sympathetic and his nephew, Ahikar, who was the chancellor of the exchequer and who had been instrumental in getting permission for Tobit to return home to Niniveh (cf. 1:21-22), took care of his uncle for two years but then moved to Elymais, the Greek name for Elam, a district northeast of the head of the Persian Gulf.

In the meantime his wife supported them by doing weaving work and selling what she made. The humiliation of the once-wealthy public servant is complete. Perhaps there is, especially in such a society, a resentment that he, a man of high station, should be reduced to being supported by his wife.

On one particular occasion, in addition to being paid for her work, her customers gave her a bonus of a young goat to be eaten. It was clearly an act of kindness to a woman who was trying to support herself and her husband.

When Tobit heard the bleating of the goat he wanted to know where it had come from. When his wife said it was a gift from a customer, he refused to believe her. He was convinced it must have been stolen (by his wife?) and insisted that it should be given back.”I became flushed with anger against her over this,” he confesses.

Understandably, she was not too pleased either. In very satirical language, she asks where is his charity now, where are his righteous deeds when dealing with his own wife. Is his charity really from the heart or is it just for show? (One thinks of Jesus’ words to the Pharisees about the way they prayed, fasted and gave alms.) Or is she sneeringly asking what good have all his praying and alms-giving done for him. Anna here plays a similar taunting role to the wife of Job.

Perhaps his wife had a point. It is not difficult for the virtuous to become hyper-virtuous. A cynic once said that to the pure all things are impure. Tobit was undoubtedly a good and very sincere person but he may, in this case, have become a victim of his own high ideals and gone beyond the evidence and failed to see that his own nearest and dearest deserved the same charity as the outsider.

Certainly, this can be a real temptation for committed Christians. We sometimes speak of the ‘street angel but house devil’. We can also see it in people who go to extremes in defending morality e. g. abortion; Christians who form elitist groups and sit in judgement on everyone else, most of all their fellow-Christians.”Let the one who is without sin cast the first stone.”

Mark 12:13-17

Possibly in response to the parable of the wicked tenants which we read yesterday, a delegation comes to confront Jesus. Their composition is rather unusual but proves the saying that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. It would be hard to find two groups more ideologically opposed than the Pharisees and the Herodians. The Pharisees set the highest standards in their observance of the Law. They were highly patriotic and strongly anti-Roman. The Herodians, on the other hand, were seen as rather lax and not particularly devout. And they had the reputation of being a little too cosy with the Roman colonial powers. In normal circumstances these two groups would never be seen in each other’s company. But now they had a common opponent in Jesus. For Jesus was seen, depending on how he was interpreted, as challenging the Law on the one hand and as a potential rallying point for anti-Roman sentiment.

The confrontation is carried out with a good deal of subtlety. It begins with shameless flattery.”We know you are an honest man, that you are not afraid of anyone, because a man’s rank means nothing to you, and that you teach the way of God in all honesty.” In fact, every word of this is absolutely true and would that it could be said of every one of us! In their book, however, it means that Jesus is a very dangerous person and, indeed, people like Jesus have run into trouble all through history, not least in our own days.

Having, as they imagined, totally disarmed Jesus by their positive approach, they smoothly slip in the knife. One can almost hear the blandness and feigned innocence with which they ask their question: “Is it permissible to pay taxes to Caesar or not?” It sounds to us a very straightforward question but it was, in fact, one of the most politically sensitive issues of the day. And, of course, it was a trick question of the “Have-you- stopped-beating-your-wife?” kind.

If Jesus said it was permissible, then he incurred the wrath of every Jewish patriot, most of all the powerful Pharisees, who deeply resented the presence of the Roman power on their land. If he said it was not permissible, then he could immediately be denounced by people like the Herodians to the Roman authorities for subversion. In either case, he would lose.

Jesus, of course, immediately sees through their deceit. He asks to be shown a denarius, a coin roughly equal to a day’s wage. It was a Roman coin and it carried the head of the emperor, Caesar Augustus. Pointing to the image, Jesus asks whose head it is and he is told it is that of the emperor.”In that case,” replied Jesus, “give to the emperor what belongs to the emperor and to God what belongs to God.”

His enemies were reduced to speechlessness and they had no comeback. It was an answer that said everything and said nothing. It said everything because no one could quarrel with it; it said nothing because it did not decide in any way what belonged to God and what to the emperor.

The whole scene, of course, reflects a serious problem besetting the early Church. How much allegiance did they owe, as Christians, to the temporal power, especially one where the emperor was seen as having divine prerogatives or was openly persecuting Christians? There were clearly limits to the allegiance they could give. This resulted in waves of persecutions and large numbers dying martyrs’ deaths rather than compromise their faith.

It is still a live issue for us today. It concerns the question of separation of Church and state and how that is to be interpreted. It concerns the way we - both electors and elected - vote when sensitive moral issues are at stake.

In one sense, God has a total claim on our allegiance. There is nothing which does not belong to him. Nevertheless, society, through its legitimate authorities, also has a claim on our allegiance. It can make demands on us in asking us to contribute e. g. through taxation, to promoting the overall well-being of our whole community, especially of those who are in need.

As Christians, we cannot simply isolate ourselves from the political arena, that is, the area in which the interests of the citizenry is discussed and managed. The political arena is inseparable from issues of truth and justice and there is no way that Christians, who are committed to building the Kingdom, cannot be concerned about the welfare of their fellow citizens.”The Church should not dabble in politics,” say some. No, it should not dabble; it should be deeply involved in every important moral and social issue.

Nevertheless, the words of Jesus remain our guiding principle: We give to God what belongs to him; we give to society what it has a right to ask of us, our cooperation in making it a place guided by the principles and values of the Kingdom. To do anything less is to fail to give everything to God.

Week 9 | Wednesday

Tobit 3:1-11,16; Mark 12:18-27

Today’s reading follows immediately on yesterday’s where we saw the good Tobit, now blind, being taunted by his wife as being something of a pious hypocrite. We are given pictures of two people in deep distress, people who feel that life is no longer worth living.

The first of these is Tobit. In response to his wife’s indignant outburst, which he seems to have felt was not altogether wide of the mark and feeling sorry for himself over his blindness, Tobit breaks into a long lament.

He acknowledges God’s truth and justice.”All your ways are mercy and truth; you judge the world.” Like Job, in spite of his distress, he never utters a word of complaint against God himself.

He pleads with God to look compassionately on him and not to punish him for his wrongdoings, including those he is not aware of. Though Tobit is a good, observant Jew, he is not without sin. At the same time, he cannot, in his position of exile, make the necessary sacrifices to atone for them.

He pleads forgiveness too for the sins of those ancestors who disobeyed the Lord’s commandments. It is no wonder that his people have suffered so much from being plundered, sent into exile and death and become a byword of mockery among the nations. To some extent he sees himself as liable for those sins too and they are partly the source of his present troubles.

“For we have sinned against you and broken your commandments; and you have given us over to be plundered, to captivity and death, to be the talk, the laughing-stock and scorn of all the nations among you have dispersed us.”

Finally, he puts himself fully into God’s hands and asks that his life on earth be terminated.”Deliver me from this affliction. Let me go away to my everlasting home. . .”

His words are similar to those of Jonah who wanted to die because God would not destroy the pagan people of Niniveh. Moses, too, prayed for death (Num 11:15) as did Elijah and Job. The “everlasting home” was Sheol, the dismal abode of the dead from which there was no return.

“It is better to die than still to live in the face of trouble that knows no pity. I am weary of hearing myself traduced.” He seeks to become again the dust from which he originally came and to find a release from the undeserved insults of his wife. God, however, has other plans as we shall see.

At this point we move, with no apparent reason, to a completely different setting. Here we are introduced to Sarah, the daughter of Raguel, who lived in Media at Ecbatana.

She had become the object of taunts from one of her maidservants. For she had been married to no less than seven different men in succession. But each one of them had died before they had had an opportunity to have intercourse together as man and wife. (See a similar yet very different situation in today’s Gospel reading.) This curse was understood to be the work of Asmodeus, “the worst of demons”.

The meaning of the name Asmodeus is uncertain but it probably means ‘the destroyer’. The name appears in the Testament of Solomon (where he also is the enemy of the marriage act) and in post-biblical Judaism; some think Asmodeus may be related to Aesma, a demon of the Parsees in northern India. The demon love, a common motif in ancient folklore, also appears in 1 Enoch 6-11. Here, the demon who cannot satisfy his lust kills his rival each time before the marriage is consummated, thus leaving Sarah without the possibility of offspring and making her the object of great reproach.

Even a maidservant accused Sarah of being the cause of her husbands’ deaths. She was a disgrace and an embarrassment to every other woman, whose primary obligation is to provide sons for her husband.

Deeply distressed, Sarah went to her father’s room with the intention of committing suicide by hanging herself. Unfair reproach leads Sarah, like Tobit, to wish and pray for death.

But then, she had second thoughts. If she hanged herself in her father’s room, the blame could fall on him. In addition, how could she cause such grief to an elderly father who loved his only daughter so much? Her death could hasten his own death.

Her rejection of suicide indicates a concern for her family which is lacking in Tobit.

Instead of hanging herself, she wanted God to allow her to die in some other way and not have to bear any more terrible insults from those around her.

Like Tobit, she then recites a prayer to God which is not included in our reading.

Once again, God has his own plans and the two, as yet unconnected, victims will be brought together in an unexpected way.

There are a number of issues for us to reflect on. In a time when assisted suicide and euthanasia are widely discussed, we need to sympathise with and try to understand the feelings of those for whom the burden of living has become too great. This is especially the case in our own times when people tend to live much longer (or are kept living much longer) and become the victims of debilitating old age. We also have the tragic situation where so many young people, especially young men, can see no future for themselves and, feeling they have no one to turn to, put an end to their lives.

In both the cases of today’s reading, we see Tobit, an older man, and Sarah, the young woman, begging God to let them leave this life. Yet, in very unexpected ways, help comes. Let’s make sure that people we know in such a situation can find the help they need. For the terminally ill, it is to be able to die with dignity and peace and surrounded by love and care. For the young, it is to know that there are always alternatives and that there are people who can understand, will not judge and want to help.

We also see in the story the secondary role of the woman as a means by which her husband can produce an heir, preferably male. It is an attitude which has not completely disappeared even in so-called enlightened societies but which needs to be challenged.

Mark 12:18-27

Jesus faces another confrontation today, this time with Sadducees. The Sadducees were a group which did not accept many of the beliefs held by the Pharisees. They confined their beliefs to the Pentateuch, the so-called books of Moses, the first five books of our Bible.

Among the beliefs they rejected was that of life after death. Armed with this conviction, they approached Jesus with a hypothetical case which they felt could not be answered by him.

A woman married a man but he died before they could have children. In order that her late husband, the eldest son in his family, would have heirs, she followed a law (known as the Levirate law) which said she had to marry her husband’s brother. She did so but he also died and, in the end, she married seven brothers, all of whom died before a child could be conceived.

The Sadducees’ question to Jesus was that, if there is life after death, which of the seven men would be her real husband in the next life? For them, of course, there was no problem but, for Jesus and all those who believed in an after-life, they thought it created an insoluble situation.

Jesus answers them on two fronts. First, he says that in the next life marriage will no longer exist. People will all be related equally in a common relationship with God. Second, he astutely quotes from the book of the Exodus, a book of the Bible which the Sadducees acknowledge as divine revelation. Jesus reminds them that God spoke to Moses from out of the burning bush and said, “I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob” (Exodus 3:6). So Jesus adds: “He is God, not of the dead but of the living.” God did not say to Moses: “I was the God of Abraham”, or “I used to be the God of Abraham’” but “I AM here and now the God of Abraham”.

Perhaps we might not be altogether swayed by this argument but, faced with a text from a part of the Bible they accepted as divine revelation, it was a statement the Sadducees could not question. And they had no comeback.

It is useful for us to be able to handle distortions of our faith which can sometimes be thrown at us. It is essential that we are familiar with our Bible in order to do so. But we might also say that we do not bring people to Christ simply by besting them in arguments. The real way to bring people to Christ is by the compelling example of our words, our actions and our attitudes reflecting his love and tolerance.

Week 9 | Thursday

Tobit 6:11;7:1,9-14;8:4-7; Mark 12:28-34

Our story of Tobit now jumps a number of incidents and moves to Tobiah, Tobit’s son. The prayers of both Tobit and Sarah are going to be answered in an unexpected way.

Having asked God to let him die, Tobit realised he needed to provide for his son, Tobiah. He remembered a very large sum of money, ten talents of silver, he had formerly deposited in far-off Media and sent Tobiah, after giving him some fatherly instruction, to pick up the money. Tobiah’s problem was that he did not know the person who had the money nor did he know how to get to Media. It is at this point that the angel Raphael appears and agrees to be Tobiah’s companion and guide.

It was while they were on the way that, as Tobiah was washing his feet in the Tigris river, a large fish jumped out of the water and tried to bite Tobiah’s foot. At Raphael’s instruction, Tobiah caught the fish and removed its gall, heart and liver. The angel told him to keep these organs for the future, as medicine. He kept the rest of the fish for eating.

It is at this point that today’s reading begins. As they enter Media on the way to Ecbatana, the angel says that they will be staying with Raguel, who is the father of Sarah and a kinsman of Tobit. On reaching the house, they find Raguel sitting by the door of his courtyard. The guests are received warmly and a sheep from the flock is killed in their honour. They bathe and then sit down to eat.

On the one hand Tobiah is rather apprehensive about meeting a woman with such a reputation but, as soon as he sees her, he asks Raphael, on his behalf, to ask for her hand in marriage.

When Raguel overhears Tobiah asking the angel (whom he calls Azariah) to get Raguel to give his daughter Sarah to him, Raguel replies that no one else has the right to take his daughter - “no one but you, my brother”. When a bride lost her husband before giving birth, there was an obligation for the nearest surviving relative of the husband to take his place (as we saw in yesterdays’ Gospel).

Raguel then warns Tobiah of what had previously happened. That seven of Raguel’s kinsmen who had tried to marry Sarah had all died as soon as they entered their bride’s room to perform the marriage act. However, in the meantime, he invited Tobiah to enjoy his meal. In view of what had happened on the previous occasions, it could well be his last! The prayer “The Lord will grant you his grace and peace” could be understood in more than one way.

But Tobiah will not sit down to eat until Raguel makes a final decision about giving his daughter in marriage. It was not polite to act in such a way but it reveals Tobiah’s anxiety to have Sarah as his wife.

Raguel then agrees to give his daughter to Tobiah: “From now on you are her brother and she is your sister. . . The Lord of Heaven favour you tonight, my son, and grant you his grace and peace.” In the circumstances, it was a prayer that Tobiah needed.

Raguel then calls for his daughter and formally hands her over to Tobiah as his wife in accordance with the laws and customs of Moses. The alliance was then confirmed with a formal, written document following all the required procedures.

After they had all eaten, the parents withdrew and left the young couple alone. They are deeply aware that this is a critical moment for both of them. They agree, first of all, to pray to the Lord for his grace and protection.

What is not mentioned here is that Tobiah had been assured that if, while making love to his wife, he burnt the heart and liver of the fish he had caught, the smoke would drive away the evil power which had destroyed the former husbands. As soon as they were alone in the bridal chamber Tobiah did this and the demon was exorcised.

Tobiah then makes a prayer. He begins with words of praise for God as the creator of all things. It was God who had created Adam and also his wife Eve “to be his help and support”. And from them the whole human race had come into being.

He reminds God too that the Creator had said that it was not good for the man to be alone and that he needed a helpmate like himself. And it is in this spirit, and not because of any lustful desire, that Tobiah wishes to take Sarah as his helpmate.

He concludes his prayer by begging God to have compassion on both of them and to grant them to live to an old age together - a very significant prayer in view of what had happened to Sarah’s previous partners. They both finish the prayer with a heartfelt ‘Amen’ - “May it be so.”

The text of this very beautiful prayer would be very suitable for any young newly married couple today. And, indeed, how many lovers think of asking God’s blessing before they enter on their lovemaking? Where else is the God who is Love more likely to be found than where love is most intensely expressed?

Mark 12:28-34

Not all the Pharisees and Scribes were hostile to Jesus. We have Nicodemus as one very good example. And here today we have a scribe who approaches Jesus with no apparently hostile motive. He had seen how well Jesus had dealt with the challenges put to him by various groups. He now comes to ask a question which was much debated among scholars.

There were more than 600 commandments in the Jewish Law and it was often asked which of these had priority over the others. Unusual for him, Jesus immediately answers the man’s question. Was this because, unlike on other occasions, it was asked with politeness and respect and was a genuine request for an opinion?

In answering the question Jesus does not give just one commandment but two:

- Love your God with your whole heart and soul

- Love your neighbour as yourself.

Both answers are taken from the Law of Moses (Deuteronomy 6:4-5 and Leviticus 19:18 respectively) and so satisfy his questioner’s request. However, as we read through the New Testament and especially the words of Jesus in the Gospel, we know that Jesus gives his own twist to these two commandments.

First, in answering a question about which is the most important commandment, he gives two commandments which, in his view, are quite inseparable; one cannot be kept without the other. We cannot say we love God and then refuse to love our neighbour. He will make two other refinements. He will extend the meaning of ‘neighbour’ to include every single person and not just the people of one’s own race, religion or family (cf . Luke 10:30-37).

And he will set as the standard of love not just the love we are able to show but the depth of love which he will show by dying for us (John 15:13) .

The scribe is very pleased with the answer that Jesus gives and expresses full agreement.”In that case,” Jesus replies, “you are not far from the kingdom of God.” That is to say, the scribe is very close to having the spirit of the Gospel and to the following of Jesus. He still has to make the crucial step of committing himself to follow Jesus and become actively involved in the work of the Kingdom.

Whether he took that step or not we will never know. However, we can make our choice to start today or renew our commitment to keep this double commandment and to reflect on how well we put them together.

Week 9 | Friday

Tobit 11:5-15; Mark 12:35-37

Tobiah did survive that first night with his bride; the spell of evil had been broken.

There followed two weeks of wedding celebrations in his wife’s home and then he was anxious to get back to his ailing father. Raguel urged Tobiah to stay on with them but the young couple were anxious to get back to Niniveh. As they left, Raguel gave Tobiah half of his property, including male and female slaves, cattle, sheep, donkeys, camels, clothing, money and household goods. There were then emotional farewells.

The couple returned home in the company of Raphael who promised that the father’s blindness would be cured. Before their return, they had also recovered the money which Tobit had asked his son to bring back from Media. Meanwhile, back in the Tobit household there was great anxiety about the fate of their son and whether he had been successful in his mission. (They knew nothing about a wedding, of course.)

Our reading opens today with Anna, Tobit’s wife, sitting outside the house watching longingly for the return of their son. On seeing Tobiah, she cried out to her blind husband: “Look, your son is coming, and the man who went with him!”

Before Tobiah reached his father, the angel told him to smear the fish gall on his father’s eyes. Then the cataracts would melt away and Tobit would be able to see again.

Anna now rushed forward and fell on her son’s neck. She was ready to die now that she had seen her son again. And she wept. Her words are echoed later on in the Gospel when Simeon lays his eyes on the infant Jesus being presented in the Temple.”Now you can dismiss your servant, O Lord” (Luke 2:29-30)

Meanwhile Tobit gets up to greet his son and gropes his way through the courtyard door. Tobiah comes forward with the fish gall in his hand, blows on his father’s eyes and then rubs on the gall. The cloudy film melts away and Tobit is able to see again. The gall was able to achieve what doctors had failed to do. Ironically, it was their failure that set in train Tobiah’s journey to get the money in Media and unexpectedly find a bride, who in turn is liberated from her curse.

Now, for the first time in years Tobit was able to see his son again, the “light of my eyes”. Once again, he breaks out into prayer but now it is a prayer of praise and thanksgiving. He had suffered a great deal but had never once made a complaint against God. Now he has his reward.

For all of us, seeing is one of our most precious gifts. But it is the seeing with the inner eye of wisdom which is even more important. Blindness in this area is a much greater affliction because it affects the direction of our whole life.

Let us pray for this gift of inner seeing. And let us thank God for all the insights we have received from him up to now.

Mark 12:35-37

In the face of the confrontations he has been experiencing Jesus now lays claim to his true identity. It had long been the belief among the Jews that the Messiah would be a

descendant of the family of David. (On the other hand, the Samaritans saw the Messiah coming through the prophetic line, cf. John 4.)

Jesus, we know from the genealogies the Gospel gives us, was of the family of David. But today he affirms he is more than just a descendant of David. He is in fact David’s Lord. Jesus quotes from Psalm 110 and we need to remember that David was believed to be the author of all the psalms, themselves words inspired by the Holy Spirit.

In Ps 110 David says:

The Lord [God] said to my Lord [the Messiah]:

Sit at my right hand and I will put your enemies under your feet.

Jesus, then, is saying two things to his opponents:

- Jesus, the descendant, is the Lord of his ancestor, King David, and he is the Messiah-King who will sit at the right hand of God. He is then also the Lord of those who are challenging him.

- God promises that he will crush all the enemies of the Messiah-King.

The argument used in this reading could hardly be used today, as we have a better understanding of the authorship of the psalms than people had in Jesus’ time.

Nevertheless, there are many other elements in the Christian Testament which lead us to the same conclusion: Jesus is Lord of all.

Does my life give testimony to that belief?

Week 9 | Saturday

Tobit 12:1,5-15,20; Mark 12:38-44

We finish today our readings from the book of Tobit. A central character has been the shadowy figure of Raphael who was in the background of much that has been happening. The characters in the story had no idea that Raphael was an angel. They saw in him a helpful guiding companion for Tobiah on his journey to Media. At the end, it is normal in such epiphanies for the divine being to reveal its identity and then suddenly disappear.

The reading begins with “When the wedding feast was over”. There had already been a wedding feast in the bride’s home but now Tobiah’s family also had to have a celebration. At the end of the meal Tobit suggests to his son, who has returned home laden with gifts, that it is time to show his appreciation to his travel companion by giving him “more than the figure agreed on”. So Tobiah offers Raphael half of all that he had brought back with him. The help that the stranger had given them had far exceeded their expectations. Their generous offering is another example of the book’s attitude to the use of money - it is to be invested in people, not selfishly hoarded.

Raphael, of course, does not need the money and could not have much use for it. Instead, he gives some parting advice to father and son and also reveals something of himself to Tobit and his son. (There is no mention of contact between the angel and the women throughout.)

He urges them first to give thanks to God for all that they have received - Tobit for his sight, Tobiah for a lovely wife, Sarah for healing from her curse. One way for them to express their thanks is to proclaim to others the great works that God has done for them.

“It is right to keep the secret of a king, yet right to reveal and publish the works of God.” This piece of advice is particularly relevant to Tobit, who had served as a courtier in the palace of the king and where a high level of confidentiality would have been expected of him. But, when it comes to the King who is our God, then we are expected to share with others everything we know and have experienced with him.

Then follows a number of pieces of advice for good living:

Do what is good and no evil will befall you

Prayer with fasting and sharing one’s goods with the poor while behaving well is better than amassing great wealth and behaving badly.”Almsgiving saves from death and purges every kind of sin.” (Think of Jesus’ words, “As often as you do it to the least of my brothers you do it to me” and St Paul, “Charity, love for others, covers a multitude of sins.”) And, of course, it was because of Tobit’s generosity with the poor, that he is rewarded with the restoration of his sight and the gift of a beautiful daughter-in-law, who herself was liberated from a diabolical curse.”Those who give alms have their fill of days; those who commit sin and do evil, bring harm on themselves.”

Then, on the principle cited above that God our King has no secrets, Raphael reveals that it was he who was interceding with God when Tobiah and Sarah prayed on their wedding night, and when Tobit did not hesitate to leave his dinner table to bury a fellow-Jew found lying murdered on the street, and when Sarah was liberated from the curse that killed her husbands.

He then identifies himself. He is Raphael, an angel, a messenger of God, one of seven “who stand ever ready to enter the presence of the glory of God”. In fact, we only know three angels’ names from the Bible: Gabriel, Michael, and Raphael. The apocrypha fill up the list of the Seven in their own extravagant way. Raphael appears only in this book (and hence will not be found in Hebrew or Protestant Bibles); Gabriel is in the Book of Daniel and in Luke’s gospel at the Annunciation; Michael also appears in the Book of Daniel and in the Book of Revelation.

It is not recorded in today’s reading but, when Raphael revealed his true identity, the two men fell prostrate on the ground in fear and awe of this divine messenger. He tells them to get up.

In a final admonition, Raphael says, “Bless the Lord on earth and gives thanks to God.” He then takes his leave with the words, “I am about to return to him who sent me from above.”

John will put similar words into the mouth of Jesus as he speaks with his disciples during the Last Supper (John 16:5). The evangelist shares with this book the pattern of a descending and ascending saviour figure. It reminds one, too, of the vision of Jacob and the ladder leading to heaven with angels ascending and descending between heaven and earth. Jesus also will say to Nicodemus: “I tell you, you will see heaven opened and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man” (John 1:51).

In the whole of this story - and it is a story, not a factual or historical account of real events - we are given material to reflect on for our own lives. We too can reflect on how God comes into our lives in many ways, in times of joy and times of sorrow.

God was not absent when Tobit went blind; it was not God who actually caused his blindness but it provided a testing time for his faith and trust in God. Similarly for Sarah and her father Raguel. The terrible curse that resulted in the death of seven husbands on her wedding night certainly was a test of faith in God’s goodness. But it was rewarded by her happy marriage to Tobiah.

There are some similarities with the story of Job (not historical either). It is easy to love God and praise him when things are going well. When disaster strikes that is the real test of our fidelity and genuineness of our commitment.

Lastly, we can ask ourselves who are the angels, the messengers that God keeps sending into our lives? Who are the people who have rescued us, who have redirected our steps when we were going astray, when we were losing faith in God’s care of us? Who brought us comfort in times of desolation? And, equally important, how often have I been an angel bringing God’s love and peace into the lives others?

Mark 12:38-44

We come today to the end of our readings from Mark’s gospel. We stop just on the threshold of prophecies about the end of Jerusalem and the final coming of Jesus and the story of his passion and resurrection.

There are two related passages today serving as entry points for this last phase of Jesus’ life and mission among us.

First, Jesus hits out at some of the scribes, the expert interpreters of the law. As such, they feel that they are expected to be perfect models of that law down to its smallest details. Jesus says they go around in long, flowing robes (the working poor could not afford to dress like that); they expect to be “greeted obsequiously” in the street and to be given the best places in the synagogue and at banquets. (Such behaviour, we have to confess, is not unknown among Christian clergy and other religious leaders.)

At the same time, Jesus says, these leaders were rapacious hypocrites. They did not hesitate to “swallow the property of widows” while, at the same time, making a show of lengthy prayers. They were the opposite of everything that Jesus was proposing as the way to love and serve God. They emphasised the external appearance rather than the inner spirit; they were concerned about being served rather than serving others; they thought only of what they could get through their privileged position rather than what they could share, especially with those in need.

Jesus warns that, precisely because of their greater knowledge of the law, their responsibilities in not keeping its real spirit will be all the greater. To whom more is given more is expected.

The mention of widows leads on to the second part of the reading. Jesus was sitting facing the treasury of the Temple and watching the people putting in their offerings. A poor widow - and widows were, almost by definition, poor and, because they could no longer produce children, regarded practically as non-persons, rejected by their husband’s family. They were often reduced to poverty. Yet, it is one of these who approaches the treasury box and drops in two coins of negligible value.

Jesus draws the attention of his disciples who were with him and points out that the poor woman had put in more than all the others combined. They were contributing what they could easily spare while she put in her whole livelihood. It was an act of total trust in God’s providence and care for her.

It has been pointed out that she put in two coins. In other words, given her situation, she would have been more than justified in putting in just one. Compare her to the rich man who could not part with his wealth to follow Jesus.

It has also been pointed out that this anonymous woman is, in a way, a symbol of Jesus himself. He also will “empty himself”, give away everything, including his life, out of love for his Father and for us. It seems no accident that the story is placed just here as Jesus enters on his final days.

Today’s two incidents both provide matter for us to reflect on. Do we wear our Christianity just on our sleeve? Do we tend to assert our “rights” over others and expect due deference from them e. g. in our working place? How much of what we have are we willing to share with others? “Teach us, Lord, to be generous.”

Week 10 | Monday

2 Corinthians 1:1-7; Matthew 5:1-12

Today we start reading from the second letter of St Paul to the Christians of the city of Corinth, in southern Greece. When we were reading the Acts of the Apostles earlier during the Easter season we saw how Paul had failed dismally in Athens but that he had done much better in Corinth.”Corinth was not only a great centre of hellenism and a magnet to every sort of philosophy and religion, it was also a notorious centre of immorality; it was a milieu that could only create awkward problems for those newly converted to a faith that had only recently been introduced” (Jerusalem Bible, Introduction to St Paul).

It is believed by some commentators that Paul wrote four letters altogether to the Corinthians but they (or parts of them) have been condensed into the two we now have. This letter was probably written from Macedonia, in northern Greece, in the year 57 AD. It is clear that this letter is dealing with serious problems Paul was having with the Corinthian community. They do not seem to be happy with him and he does not seem to be happy with them. At the same time, the letter produces some of the loveliest thoughts of Paul and reveal his strong emotional side. He was a person of very strong feelings.

Today’s passage is the opening greeting and comes from both Paul and his fellow-missionary, Timothy. It is addressed not only to the Christians in Corinth itself but also to those in the surrounding province of Achaia.

“Grace and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.” This lovely greeting has been happily incorporated into our own liturgies.

The opening then follows the usual Pauline form, except that the thanksgiving takes the form of a doxology or glorification of God - “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of compassion and the God of all comfort.”

Paul expands a standard Jewish blessing so as to introduce the central theme of his prayer. The theme of ‘comfort’ or ‘consolation’ (paraklesis) occurs no less than 10 times in this short passage against a background formed by multiple references to “affliction” and “suffering”.

From this term, too, we have the word ‘Paraclete’ (Parakletes) ‘Comforter’ used by Jesus to describe the Holy Spirit. It is a word which combines the meanings of comforter, consoler, supporter, advocate, encourager and the like. It was, for instance, a term used for a lawyer who stands by you in a court case.

The passage is a deeply prayerful meditation on the experience of both suffering and comfort shared by both Paul and the Corinthians, and drawn, at least in part, from Paul’s reflections on a recent infliction. He describes this painful experience in the passage immediately following but it is not included in our reading. He says: “We do not want you to be unaware, brothers and sisters, of the infliction that came upon us in the [Roman] province of Asia; we were utterly weighed down beyond our strength, so that we despaired even of life. . . God rescued us from such great danger of death, and he will continue to rescue us. . .” (vv. 8-10).

What Paul is saying to the Corinthians is that God, through Jesus, is the source of all comfort and consolation in every affliction we can experience. And it is an encouragement which we, in our turn, should pass on to others who are similarly afflicted. For, just as Christ’s sufferings overflow to us for our benefit, in the same way through Christ our encouragement is to overflow to others.

The Father of compassion is the Father of our Lord Jesus; Paul’s sufferings and “comfort” are experiences in union with Christ. The “consolation” and “comfort” of Israel is Jesus himself, as we read in Luke’s account of the Presentation of Jesus in the Temple (Luke 2:25).

So, when Paul and his companions suffer (for whatever reason) it is to bring the Corinthians encouragement and salvation and that, in turn, enables Paul and his companions to accept their sufferings. This is an important lesson for all of us. Sufferings are not simply negative experiences; they can be a source of encouragement for others. Others can benefit from our sufferings.

Paul concludes by saying, “Our confidence in you is firm, for we know that as we share in the sufferings, you also share in the encouragement.” The terrible sufferings of Jesus on the Cross brought so much to the world and to each one of us who believe in him. We might call this ‘creative’ or ‘redemptive’ suffering for some pain is without meaning and is purely destructive.”Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted” (Matt 5:4).

The lesson of the reading is that we, for our part, should become comforters and consolers of others in their difficulties and sorrows. And, in doing so, we may have to endure some suffering ourselves. But it is a pain that brings, not destruction, but healing. As Christ’s comforting overflows into us, so should ours overflow from us to reach out to others.

Paul even goes further to say that the sufferings he has borne for his faith in Jesus Christ should be a source of comfort and strength for the Christians of Corinth and that in turn is a source of comfort for them when they themselves undergo hardships for their faith.

Suffering for the faith is itself paradoxically a kind of comfort and consolation.”Blessed are you when they insult and persecute you and utter every kind of evil against you because of me.” It is those last three words which give a positive meaning to an apparently very contradictory statement. It is a grace to be ready to suffer for the Gospel of Truth and Love and Justice.

It is - as many Christians have proved through the ages - a source of real joy. Because it means an even closer identification with the suffering, dying - and rising Lord.

If we ever find ourselves in a situation where we are under criticism for being Christian we might call to mind these words of Paul.

Matthew 5:1-12

Sermon on the Mount

Today we begin reading from Matthew’s gospel and will continue to do so for several weeks to come. We begin with chapter 5 and the Sermon on the Mount.

In reading Matthew’s gospel we need to remember that it was directed primarily at a readership with a Jewish background and in this it differs greatly from Mark. One of Matthew’s aims is to present Jesus as the new Moses, transcending but not putting aside the law given to the Israelites by the first Moses. And, as the law of Moses is contained in what we call the Pentateuch, the first five books of the Bible, so the law or teaching of Jesus is presented uniquely in this gospel by five long discourses.

The first of these is the Sermon on the Mount and it consists mainly of the qualities which are expected of a follower of the new Law and the new Moses, Jesus.

It begins with what we call the Eight Beatitudes. It could be said that these have been greatly under-rated in the life of the Christian churches, Catholic and otherwise. Most people tend to see the centre of Christian living in the Ten Commandments and yet they really belong to the Hebrew Testament, they are part of that Law which the coming of Jesus did not nullify but transcended. They are, of course, still valid as moral guidelines but, in many ways, they fall far short of what is presented by Jesus in the Beatitudes.

It would seem, in fact, that Matthew is presenting the Beatitudes as taking over the role of the Commandments and this is indicated by the prominent place they have in forming the opening of the first discourse. They are, as it were, a manifesto of Jesus’ message and his call to see the world in his way. They express the necessary attitudes of those who belong to the Kingdom. Those who have these attitudes already have entered that Kingdom.

Perhaps a few words about the ‘Kingdom’ are in order. In many ways, Matthew’s gospel can be called ‘a Gospel of the Kingdom’. The phrase that Matthew consistently uses, however, is ‘Kingdom of heaven’. For many people this can be misleading because it causes them to think that Jesus is talking about the next life, our life in ‘heaven’. So that the Beatitudes are interpreted as conditions to be observed by those who want to go to heaven after they die.

This, I believe, would be a serious misreading of the text. Matthew uses the term ‘kingdom of heaven’ because, mindful of the Jewish background of his readers, he does not like to mention the name of God directly. He uses other circumlocutions in the course of his gospel to get around using God’s name. As when he has Jesus say, “Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them.” By using the passive in the second half of the statement, he avoids mentioning the Doer, God. The other gospels have no hesitation in talking about the ‘Kingdom of God’ and that is what Matthew also means.

What is this kingdom? It is not a place. The Greek word basileia is an abstract word which means ‘kingship’ or ‘reign’ rather than ‘kingdom’, which suggests a territory. ‘Kingship’ or ‘reign’ on the contrary suggests power. To belong to the Kingdom or Kingship of God, then, is to put oneself fully, consciously and deliberately under the power of God, to experience that power and be empowered by it. That power is above all the power of agape-love.

When we say in the Lord’s Prayer, “Your Kingdom come”, we are not talking about a future life after death but praying that people everywhere put themselves under the loving power of God. That is made clear by the petition immediately following: “Your will be done on earth…” Our first call as Christians is to belong to, to enter that Kingdom and not just to be a member of the Church.

The Church is, in so far as it is faithful to the call of Christ, part of the Kingdom but the Kingdom extends far beyond the membership of the Church. The Church is, as it were, the sacrament or visible sign of the Kingdom. As examples, I would suggest that people like Mahatma Gandhi and the Dalai Lama are people who are very much full of the spirit of the Kingdom, more so, I dare to say, than many of us who are baptised. It is significant, I think, that Gandhi was particularly fond of the Beatitudes and identified with them.

It is time now to look at today’s text.

It begins with Jesus seeing the crowds and going up a hill. Moses, too, delivered God’s law from an elevated place, Mount Sinai. In neither case can we identify the actually mountain or hill, although traditionally, of course, a hill in Palestine has been called the Mount of the Beatitudes.

In the traditional way of a teacher, Jesus sits down to teach. We see him doing the same in the synagogue at Nazareth (Luke 4:20). He is joined by his disciples and it is not clear whether they were the primary object of his teaching or that the crowds were also included. The teaching, of course, is directed to followers and, in particular, to those reading the gospel.

Jesus begins the discourse with the wonderful words of the Beatitudes. There are eight of them, each one beginning with the words, “Happy are those…” ‘Happy’ is a translation of the Greek adjective makarios which includes not only the idea of happiness but also of good fortune, of being specially blessed. So we can translate it as “Blessed indeed are those…” or “Fortunate indeed are those…”

It is important to realise that being a follower of Christ is intended to be a source of deep happiness and a realisation that one is truly fortunate to have discovered this vision of life.

At a first reading, the Beatitudes seem to fly in the face of commonly accepted ideals of the good life. It takes a deeper reading to see their inner truth.

How happy are the poor in spirit, theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

The Gospel in general shows great concern for the poor, that is, all those people who are deprived of what they rightfully need to lead a life of decent dignity. Why should the poor be particularly blessed? As people living in deprivation, obviously they are not. But in terms of the Kingdom they are blessed because in the Kingdom, where love, compassion and justice prevail there is no place for such inequality. The Kingdom is an environment of interlocking relationships where people take care of each other and where the resources of all are shared according to the needs of all. The Kingdom is a place of blessings and happiness for the poor because it spells the end of their poverty. The poor are the “little ones” that Jesus speaks about as qualification for entering the Kingdom. They are the “last” who will be first. And, while ‘poverty’ in a wider sense can be applied to all, Jesus is thinking especially of the material simplicity that he expects from his disciples, a poverty which he himself experienced with “nowhere to lay his head”. Wealth can only mean depriving the needy of what they should have.

Matthew is unique in using the term ‘poor in spirit’. It is a significant addition. While the Gospel in speaking of the poor is mainly and rightly concerned with the materially poor, Matthew’s phrase can broaden the concept. Because, in reality, there are many other ways in which people can be deprived and regarded as poor. We are more sensitive to this in our own day with our deeper insights into psychological and sociological factors. People can, although materially well off, be literally poor in spirit. That is, they have little spirit, very little happiness, lives of full of stress and anxiety and anger and resentment. These are all the result of our highly competitive, each-person-for-himself society which is everything that the Kingdom is not. Taken in that sense, the Beatitude applies to a very large number of people.

Happy the gentle; they shall have the earth for their heritage.

The word ‘gentle’ is variously translated as ‘meek’, ‘lowly’, ‘humble’. The Greek word comes from the noun prautes. The beatitude is reminiscent of a phrase in Psalm 37: “The humble shall have the land for their own to enjoy untroubled peace.”

Probably ‘gentle’ is the better rendering. It suggests someone who is kind and caring and not particularly assertive and dominating. In our rough and tumble society such people normally get pushed aside and can thus be classed among the ‘lowly’ and the ‘humble’. But they are not necessarily ‘meek’, which suggests people who allow themselves to be trampled on. Rather they belong to those who subscribe to active non-violence. That is, they will never resort to any form of violent behaviour to achieve their goals but they are active and pro-active, not passive - or meek. We think of people like Martin Luther King and Dorothy Day. To be ‘gentle’ in this sense requires a great inner strength and, of course, in the Kingdom there is a very desirable need for such people. It is there that they will come into their own.

In some texts this Beatitude is interchanged with the following and sometimes it is presented as an addition to the first about the “poor in spirit” where “gentle” is understood as “lowly” cf. Ps 37:11). In this case there would only be seven Beatitudes, a more biblical number.

Happy those who mourn; they shall be comforted.

Mourning and happiness would seem to be contradictory to each other. It does not say what the mourning might be about. It could be the death of a family member or a loved one. But it could be something quite different altogether.

Again we have to see the beatitude in the context of the Kingdom. There, those who mourn - for whatever reason - can be sure of experiencing the comfort and support of their brothers and sisters. That is something that they cannot be always sure of in a world where people are too busy taking care of their own immediate interests. Mourning by itself is never a happy experience but it can become a blessing when surrounded by the right people as their love and concern are poured out.

Happy those who hunger and thirst for what is right; they shall be satisfied.

‘What is right’, ‘what is just’. Justice is done when each person is accorded what belongs to them. A just world is a world of right relationships; in the Kingdom that is realised. And so, those who truly hunger and thirst to see justice done in our world for every single person will see their dreams and hopes come to fruition.

It is a hunger and thirst which everyone of us should pray to have. Only when we all have that hunger and thirst will justice be achieved and the Kingdom become a reality. We have made progress over the years but we still have a long, long way to go.

Happy the merciful; they shall have mercy shown them.

Mercy, compassion, the ability to forgive fully. The Kingdom is a world full of mercy and forgiveness. And just as we will be ready to forgive others we will find that others will be ready to forgive us when we fail in our responsibilities towards others. In the Lord’s Prayer, which is a prayer of the Kingdom, this is what we ask for: “Forgive us our sins because we forgive the sins of those who have offended us.” In fact, it is impossible for those who belong to the Kingdom to be offended and forgiveness comes easily to them.

That does not mean, of course, that we condone every wrong. The question of justice always remains. But condemning wrong does not exclude healing wounds caused by the hurt which wrongdoing causes.

And mercy understood as compassion is a particularly desirable quality in a Kingdom person. Such a person not only experiences pity for those who suffer but knows how to enter into and empathise with what they are going through. This was a quality found again and again in Jesus himself.

Happy the pure in heart; they shall see God.

‘Pure’ here is not referring primarily to sexual purity. The pure in heart are those whose vision is totally free of any distortion or prejudice. They see things exactly as they are. As a result, they have little difficulty in recognising the presence and the action of God in the people and the environment around them.

This purity of heart, this ability to be able to see with perfect clarity is truly a gift. It requires a high level of integrity on our part; but the rewards are enormous.

Happy the peacemakers; they shall be called children of God.

Surely one of the most beautiful of the beatitudes and the one we would all love to have applied to ourselves. In a world so full of divisions and conflicts of all kinds the role of the peacemaker is so much needed. It is something we can all do, starting in our own homes, then in our working places and the wider society. It is something we can do as individuals and in groups, as parishes and churches.

And, how true that, as peacemakers, we can be called ‘children of God’! The Letter to the Ephesians speaks beautifully of Jesus as making peace, breaking down walls between people, by his death on the cross (Eph 2:14ff).

Happy are those who are persecuted in the cause of right; theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Most people would hardly regard being persecuted, which could involve prison, torture and death, as a source of happiness. But it is not the persecution that triggers the happiness but the reason why it is willingly undergone.

Right from the beginnings of the Church, as described in the Acts of the Apostles, Christians rejoiced to be found worthy to suffer with and like their Lord in the proclamation of his message and way of life. That way of life was so precious to them, such a source of meaning, that they were more than willing to give their lives to defend it.

In prison, they sang songs and prayed as later the civil rights leaders (most of them committed Christians) in the United States would sing “We shall overcome” as they rode the paddy wagons to jail. It is a much more painful experience to compromise with our deepest convictions in order to avoid criticism or physical suffering. They are indeed, as Jesus says, the successors to the great prophets of the Hebrew Testament.

Happy are those who with integrity can stand by their convictions whatever the cost.

Some people have seen in these Beatitudes a portrait of Jesus himself and certainly they should be the portrait of every Christian and of every Kingdom person. They are the charter people everywhere (and not just Christians) are called to follow. They go far beyond what is demanded of in the Ten Commandments. The Commandments are not so difficult to follow and, in so far as several of them are expressed in the negative (‘Thou shalt not…’), they can be observed by doing nothing! There is no way, however, that people can ever say they observe any Beatitude to the fullest. They always call us to a further and higher level.

Week 10 | Tuesday

2 Corinthians 1:18-22; Matthew 5:13-16

It seems that Paul has incurred a certain amount of criticism from the Corinthians and is coming to his own defence.

In the verses just preceding today’s reading he admits that he had intended paying them a double visit. On his way to Macedonia, he intended passing through Corinth and then pass through Corinth again on his way back. He did not do this and it seems he was accused of being two-faced, of being a ‘Yes’ and ‘No’ person at the same time. Feelings seem to have been so strong against Paul that he had to deal with the problem at a distance through letters and delegations. (Internal conflicts among Christians are nothing new!)

Unable to deny the change in plans, Paul nonetheless asserts the firmness of the original plan and claims that it does not indicate in any way a lack of constancy in his behaviour and work. He grounds his defence in God himself, who is utterly firm and reliable. So he claims that this quality can expect to be found in varying degrees in all those who are associated with God. Christ, Paul and the Corinthians all participate in analogous ways in the constancy of God.

So he goes to his own defence and denies that he was in any way two-faced: “I declare that my word to you is not ‘yes’ one minute and ‘no’ the next.” Like Jesus, his Lord, he claims that he together with his missionary companions, Timothy and Silvanus, were never anything but ‘Yes’.

However many God’s promises are, they are always an unequivocal ‘Yes’ - not ‘No’ or ‘Maybe’. Similarly, an ‘Amen’ (So be it) from Paul and his helpers goes through Jesus to God for his glory.

The real source of Paul’s security in the Corinthians and the one who anointed him and his companions for their work is the same God. Their guarantee of that is their total endorsement of Jesus.

In turn, “it is he who anointed us and has sealed us, thereby depositing the first payment, the Spirit, in our hearts”. The Corinthians should be assured, then, that his failure to make the promised visit was not due to any insincerity on Paul’s part.

We might note that a number of the terms in the passage, which appear related only in concept in Paul’s Greek or an English translation, would be variations of the same root word in a Semitic mind, such as Paul’s. These include the words “Yes, faithful, Amen, gives us security, faith, and stand firm.”

Integrity is an essential quality in our Christian life.”Blessed are the pure in heart, they shall see God.” People need to be confident that what they see in us and hear from us comes from deep within us. Paraphrasing the computer slogan we should be able to say of ourselves, “What you see is what there is”. Falsehood or hypocrisy of any kind will seriously diminish the effectiveness of our Christian witness.

Parents and teachers and others responsible for the formation of the young have a special responsibility here. We are not to be like the Pharisees who teach one thing and do differently.

Matthew 5:13-16

Sermon on the Mount (cont’d): We may be totally filled with the spirit of the Beatitudes but it will not do very much good unless their effects are clearly seen in our lives. To be a Christian it is not enough to be good; we must be seen to be so. It is not enough to ‘have a spirituality’ that fills us with a feeling of peace and tranquillity. The spirituality of the Gospel is essentially outreaching. We have not only to be disciples of Christ but also need to proclaim him.

So Jesus, immediately following the Beatitudes, presents us with a number of images expressing this.”You are the salt of the earth.” Salt is an essential ingredient in almost all cooked food (even sweet food) to provide taste. We all know what it is like to have soup that contains no salt; we know how much part salt plays in flavouring mass-produced fast foods.

We are to be like salt; we are to give taste, zest to our environment. We do that through the specific outlook on life which we have and which we invite others to share. At their best, Christians have been very effective in doing this and have had a great impact on the values of many societies and in bringing about great changes.

To be tasteless salt is to be next to useless. Salt that has lost its taste is only fit to be thrown out. At the same time, in the West we sometimes, too, put some salt on the side of our plate. That salt, however, tasty it may be is still not doing any good unless it is put into the food. And this is an interesting feature of salt, namely, that it blends completely with food and disappears. It cannot be seen, but it can be tasted.

That reminds us that we as Christians, if we are to have the effect of giving taste, must be totally inserted in our societies. We have to resist any temptation, as Christians, to withdraw and separate ourselves from the world. It is a temptation we can easily fall into and there are many places in our cities where the Church is absent nowadays. There is no salt there. In our commercial districts, in our industrial areas, in our entertainment and media centres, where is the visible Christian presence?

Other images used by Jesus today include being the “light of the world” or being a city built on top of a hill. There is no way it can be hidden; it sticks out like a sore thumb. And what is the point of lighting a candle and then covering it over with a tub? You light a candle to give light so that people can see their way and will not fall. To be baptised and to go into virtual hiding is like lighting and then covering up a candle.

Finally, Jesus gives us the reason for making ourselves so visible. It is so that people may see our good works? In order that we can bask in their admiration and wonder? No, but so that they will be led through us to the God who made them, who loves them and wants to lead them to himself.

It is for us today to reflect on how visible our Christian faith is to others both as individuals, as families, as members of a Christian group, as parishioners, as a diocese.

Are there people or places in our area where a Christian witness is for all intents and purposes absent. Can we do anything about that?

Week 10 | Wednesday

2 Corinthians 3:4-11; Matthew 5:17-19

Today’s reading is part of Paul’s defence of his behaviour and of his credentials with the Christian community in Corinth. However, as often happens, it leads him into making statements which go far beyond his own personal interests and leave us with ideas providing much material for theological and spiritual reflection.

In the verses immediately preceding our reading, Paul has just said that one of his main credentials are the Christians of Corinth themselves.”You are our letter of commendation written on our hearts, known and read by all.”

And ultimately he now says that all the credit for what has been achieved in Corinth comes not from Paul himself but from God.”He is the one who has given us the qualifications to be the administrators of this new covenant.” Paul has not appointed himself; it God in Jesus who has called him. And this “new covenant” is not of a written law but of the Spirit. It is a covenant not confined to a legal document but is the living testimony of the Corinthians themselves.

And, perhaps in a remark pointing at some of his more legalistic critics, he affirms that “the written letters bring death, but the Spirit gives life”. It is a remark that should be engraved on all our hearts. Again and again, it has been the lists of laws and rules that has often been the kiss of death for Christian communities and is a problem which continues to bedevil us today. For Paul, to cling tenaciously to the letter of the Law is to die, to atrophy.

Paul’s confidence is grounded in his sense of a God-given mission. His qualifications come entirely from God’s calling. Paul is now living in a new covenant, characterised by the Spirit, which gives life. The term ‘new covenant’ comes from Jeremiah: “The days are coming says the Lord when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. It will not be like the covenant I made with their fathers the day I took them by the hand to lead them forth from the land of Egypt; for they broke my covenant and I had to show myself their master, says the Lord. This is the covenant I will make. . . after those days. I will place my law within them, and write it on their hearts; I will be their God, and they shall be my people” (Jer 31:31-33).

And he goes on in words that must have been very provocative for some of his more conservative hearers - if there was so much brightness accompanying the giving of the Law on Mt Sinai, such that the people could not look directly at the shining face of Moses, what brightness must accompany the giving of the Spirit?

Paul’s words here seem directed against individuals who appeal to the glorious Moses and fail to perceive any comparable glory either in Paul’s life as an apostle or in the Gospel he preaches. He asserts in response that Christians have a glory of their own that far surpasses that of Moses. Not so much because of who they are but because of the message which inspires their lives.

He refers to the Old Law, carved on tablets of stone, as a “ministry of death”. He is speaking of the Mosaic law in its limitations. It leads to death rather than life, to condemnation rather than reconciliation. For its defendants, it was “glorious”, as indicated by the shining face of Moses. Paul does not deny that but asserts that its glory was only temporary and fades in the face of Jesus’ ministry of life. The glory of the new reduces the former glory to no glory at all.

“If there was any splendour in administering condemnation, there must be very much greater splendour in administering justification.” This is the difference between the law and the Spirit. The law tends to bring judgement on people but the Spirit gives life and renewal. The law points out the limits for people’s behaviour - ‘Don’t do this’, ‘Don’t do that’. The Spirit calls forward to a much deeper level of living.

“If the ministry of condemnation was glorious, the ministry of righteousness will abound much more in glory.” The Law was a complex of things that must be done and even more things that must not be done. The “ministry of righteousness” we find in the teaching of Jesus is an inspiration continually to reach beyond ourselves. It is the difference between the Ten Commandments and the Beatitudes. In the fact, the Law, which seemed such a great thing at the time, has now been surpassed by a far more inspirational vision.

Jesus said that he had not come to abolish the Law but to fulfil it. In doing so, he simply left it behind.”For if what was going to fade was glorious, how much more will what endures be glorious.”

It is that Spirit which Paul wants the Corinthians to experience rather than go back to the old days of blindly following a legalistic system, whose observance was often measured by what could be seen externally. The Law leads to rigidity and stagnation, the Spirit to spontaneity and creativity.

What Paul said then is equally true for us now. There is a certain tempting security in following a set of do’s and don’ts which some people are tempted to follow it but it leads ultimately to stagnation and often to a not very attractive self-righteousness. But it is the Spirit that gives life and brings people together in love, unity and harmony. That is the only way that the Kingdom can be built.

Matthew 5:17-19

Sermon on the Mount (cont’d):

We have said that Matthew’s gospel is primarily directed at a readership with a Jewish background. It is clear that their Jewish background and traditions were things which it was not easy for Christian converts to give up. Both Paul and Matthew go out of their way to assure Jewish converts that Christianity is not a rejection of Judaism but its natural development. It is everything that Judaism is and more.

So, in today’s passage which continues the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus solemnly assures his readers, “Do not imagine that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets. I have come not to abolish but to complete them.” Jesus has not come not to terminate the Law but to bring it to a higher level. (In a rough simile, it is like the upgrading of a computer by e. g. increasing its memory. It is still the same computer doing the same things, only better and faster.) The vision of Jesus helps us to see the Law in a new light.

So Jesus says that the Law is still to be observed. Of course, we will see very clearly in the following days exactly what Jesus means. He is not saying that every single injunction of the Law (some of which seem very strange to us) has to be literally observed but rather that the spirit behind those injunctions is still in force. His words are meant to console but they are also a challenge, as we shall see. The New Law does not mean simply the addition of new elements. There is what we would call now a ‘paradigm shift’ to a Way which goes beyond laws to the Law of Love.

In our Church, too, we need to be ready to move forward creatively to new ways of understanding our faith and living it out. The traditions of the past are still valid but we must never get bogged down in them to the extent that we do not respond to the clear signs of the times. Tradition can be understood in two ways: either as a fundamental belief that has existed from the very beginning or simply a way of doing or understanding things which has been around for a long time.

When will the Church stop changing? we hear some people ask. The answer is, Hopefully never. The day we close ourselves to change is the day we die, as Paul warns us in the Second Letter to the Corinthians. To quote Cardinal Newman, To live is to change; to be perfect is to have changed often. He knew about change. He made radical changes in his own understanding of the Christian faith, changes which he saw as unavoidable although they involved great sacrifices on his part and led him from the Anglican to the Catholic Church.

Week 10 | Thursday

2 Corinthians 3:15-4:1,3-6; Matthew 5:20-26

We continue the point that Paul was making yesterday. We have a passage rich in meaning and full of allusions to the experience at Mount Sinai. He continues telling the Corinthians that observance of the Law by itself can only bring death while the Spirit brings life.

“To this day, whenever Moses is read, a veil lies over their hearts.” Paul now switches from the time of the covenant at Mount Sinai to the present time. He is saying that the Israelites in the time of Moses typify the Jews of the present time and he may also be referring to some Christians of Jewish origin, who still do not recognise the temporary nature of the glory that was seen in Moses. As a result, when the writings of Moses are read in the synagogue, a veil still prevents them recognising the temporary nature of Moses’ glory. There is, as it were, a veil preventing their full understanding.

When Moses read the Law to the people he had to veil his face because the people could not stand its brightness. But now, Paul says, the veil is not on the face of Moses but over the minds of the hearers who cannot see that the message of Moses has been overtaken by the Word of Christ.

However, “whenever one turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away”. In Exodus, Moses appeared before God without the veil and gazed on God’s face unprotected. Paul applies that passage to converts to Christianity: when they turn to the Lord fully and authentically, the impediment to their understanding is removed. They can look God in the face.

“The Lord is the Spirit, where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.” The “Lord” to whom the Christian turns is the Spirit of whom Paul has been speaking, the life-giving Spirit of the living God, the inaugurator of the new covenant and ministry. He is also the Spirit of Christ. And the Spirit of Jesus is a spirit of real freedom, which enables one to follow God’s truth and love creatively and to become more alive every day. This is in contrast to the smothering effect of the ‘ministry of death’ from the old Law which brought so much condemnation.

“We, with our unveiled faces reflecting like mirrors the brightness of the Lord, all grow brighter and brighter, as we turn into the image that we reflect.” Here we have the veil image being used again. Christians (Israelites from whom the veil has been removed) are like Moses, standing in God’s presence, beholding and reflecting his glory.

Through our “gazing” at the Lord we become trans-formed, con-formed more and more to the likeness of Jesus, who is himself the very Image of God.”Who sees me, sees the Father. . . The Father and I are one.” The life-giving Spirit of God, who is also in Jesus, is already present in the community where the trans-formation is already taking place. The community is the Spirit-filled Body of Christ.

“Therefore, since we have this ministry through the mercy shown us, we are not discouraged.” A ministry of this sort generates confidence and forthrightness, even when Paul - as at present - meets with criticism and opposition. He is confident that the Spirit of God is with him and the work he is doing for the Gospel.

He now deals briefly with some of the criticism that is aimed at him.”Even though our gospel is veiled, it is veiled for those who are perishing. . .” Here is the final application of the veil image. It seems Paul is being criticised either for obscurity in his preaching or for the way in which he presents the Gospel (perhaps for his criticism of the Jewish tradition, which is particularly resented by some who see Paul himself as a once zealous Jew). He confidently asserts, however, that there is no veil over his gospel. If some fail to perceive its light, that is because of their lack of belief.

For “the god of this age has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, so that they may not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.” The veil lies over their own eyes, a blindness induced by Satan, “the god of this world”, and a sign that they are headed for destruction.

Their criticism of Paul is misdirected “for we do not preach ourselves but Jesus Christ as Lord, and ourselves as your slaves for the sake of Jesus”. The light that is revealed in Paul’s preaching comes, not from him, but from the glory of Christ of which he is the messenger. Far from preaching himself, the preacher should always be a transparent medium through whom Jesus is perceived. The preacher is a “slave” of Jesus and not someone who just uses the name of Jesus to draw attention to himself. As John the Baptist said of Jesus: “He must increase; I must decrease.”

“For God who said, ‘Let light shine out of darkness‘, has shone in our hearts to bring to light the knowledge of the glory of God on the face of Jesus Christ.” Paul alludes to his own dramatic calling when the light shone from heaven on him as he went to Damascus to attack the Christians there. That was the beginning of Paul’s call to serve the Gospel of Jesus. Perhaps the quotation is also is an echo of the creation of light at the beginning of the Book of Genesis (1:3) and that Paul is presenting his apostolic ministry as a new creation. There may also be an allusion to Is 9:1 (“The people who walked in darkness have seen a great light”), thus suggesting his prophetic calling as servant of the Lord and a light to the nations. And the purpose of his mission is to reveal to others the glory of God visible on the face of Jesus Christ through his life, death and resurrection.

On the one hand we too, like Moses and Paul, are called to reflect the brightness of God and, at the same time, we ourselves become brighter and brighter as we grow more and more into the image of God. And our light is not, as Jesus tells us in the Sermon on the Mount, meant to dazzle or turn people’s gaze away but rather to help them realise the brightness of God himself and lead them on to him. As Jesus said in the Sermon on the Mount: “Your light must shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and give glory to your heavenly Father” (Matt 5:16).

Matthew 5:20-26

Sermon on the Mount (cont’d):

What Jesus means by saying that he has not come to abolish the old Law but to transcend it is made clear by six examples that he gives of how a number of Old Testament sayings are to be understood by his followers. In fact, he says that if we wish to be his followers and do his work we must move forward to the deeper level of understanding he proposes.

“Unless your virtue goes deeper and greatly surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never get into the Kingdom.” It is clear from what we see of the Scribes and Pharisees in the gospels that for them religious virtue consisted in the most exact external observance of every detail of Jewish Law. The more perfect the observance of the letter of the Law, the closer one was to God. Jesus challenged that understanding and it led to serious confrontations with the religious leadership.

Of course, the way of the Scribes and Pharisees has its attractions. It is a much easier way to measure one’s obedience to God. And one finds the same among other religions today, including, for instance, Christians and Muslims. Among Christians (including Catholics) today, one finds that there are many who are very anxious to know whether a certain action “is a sin” or not. On the other hand, such an approach leads in many cases to scrupulosity and fear, finding sin even in minutiae. God becomes a menacing shadow ready to strike at the smallest wrongdoing.

Speaking of the Jewish law, the first example Jesus gives is of the commandment: “You must not kill” (Exodus 20:13). Jesus’ understanding of this commandment goes far beyond the actual killing of another person. He extends it even to anger and abusive language. And anger can often be totally locked inside and invisible to an outsider.

“Whoever is angry with his brother will be liable to judgement, and whoever says to his brother ‘Raqa’ (empty-headed nitwit), will be answerable to the Sanhedrin, and whoever says ‘You fool’ will be liable to fiery Gehenna.” In other words, Jesus excludes any kind of violent behaviour towards a brother or sister, either in action, or word, or even thought.

He also links our interpersonal behaviour to our relationship to God. It is no good, then, piously bringing our offering to the altar in the temple and presenting it to God

while we are – through our own fault – in conflict with a brother or sister. We cannot separate our relationship with God and with that of a brother/sister. This will be spelt out in other parts of the Gospel. Before we make our offering, we must first be reconciled with our offended brother/sister and only then, after the injury has been healed, make our offering. Jesus also recommends early reconciliation if only to avoid greater troubles later on. It is not worth going to jail simply out of hatred or anger towards another.

All this is very relevant to us. Whenever we celebrate the Eucharist we should recall what Jesus says in this text and are invited to put it into practice. Before we make our offering of the bread and wine, we are invited, at the beginning of the Eucharist, to confess our sins to God and to the gathered community: “I confess to almighty God and to you, my brothers and sisters, that I have sinned…” How often do we really think about what we are saying at this time?

Again, before sharing with others in the Body and Blood of the Lord, we pray: “Forgive us our sins as we forgive those who offend us.” And we are also invited to make a sign of peace with all those around us. For how can we share in the Body and Blood of the Lord if we are at enmity with a brother or sister who is a member of that same Body? But again, so often this is often just an empty gesture, like a nod of the head, with very little real meaning and, for the most part, made to someone we do not even know. Let us put the meaning back into what can so easily degenerate into a meaningless ritual.

Week 10 | Friday

2 Corinthians 4:7-15; Matthew 5:27-32

Having presented an impressive picture of the Christian as someone brighter than Moses reflecting the glory and beauty of God’s Word, Paul now goes on to the paradox which this situation raises.

He confronts the difficulty that his present existence does not appear glorious at all, that it is marked instead by suffering and death. He deals with this by developing a topic mentioned earlier, asserting his faith in the presence and ultimate triumph of life, both in his own and in every Christian existence, in spite of the experience of physical suffering and death.

Certainly, many of his critics would have called in question the image he himself offered to the world. And Paul is the first to make the admission.”We are only the earthenware jars that hold this treasure, to make it clear that such an overwhelming power comes from God and not from us.” The treasure is the glory that he proclaims and into which all those who hear and accept the message will be trans-formed. But the instruments carrying that treasure are very fragile, like the small terracotta bowls used for oil lamps.

He will make the same point later in his famous passage about the mysterious “sting of the flesh” with which he was afflicted.”When I am weak, then I am strong.”

In doing the work of the Gospel Paul gives a list of some of the troubles he has experienced but their net outcome is that others have benefited.

“In difficulties on all sides, but never cornered;

see no answer to our problems, but never despair;

persecuted, but never deserted;

knocked down, but never killed.”

The picture is a negative one but there is always an underlying experience of bringing help and salvation into people’s lives. As, of course, was the ultimate outcome of the appalling suffering and death of Jesus.

And so he concludes: “Always, wherever we may be, we carry with us in our body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus, too, may always be seen in our body.” What a marvellous saying! Jesus is the paradigm. Paul’s sufferings are connected with Christ’s and his deliverance is a sign that he is to share in Jesus’ resurrection. Even when battered and bruised and rejected, he is reflecting the life-giving suffering and death of Jesus. A saying that could be applied to many who have suffered for the Gospel.

He continues in the same vein: “While we are still alive, we are consigned to our death every day, for the sake of Jesus, so that in our mortal flesh the life of Jesus, too, may be openly shown. So death is at work in us, but life in you.” In other words, his experience of suffering does not end in himself but affects others. The Christ-like suffering which Paul experiences brings life to those to whom he brings the Gospel. Here is a living out of the eighth Beatitude: “Happy are those who suffer in the cause of right.”

All of this is an important clarification of what he meant earlier by the dazzling brightness of the Christian disciple and apostle. The greatest brightness is seen in the one who is ready to undergo every suffering and every indignity for the sake of Jesus. It is the thinking behind John’s gospel where the evangelist sees Jesus’ last agonising moments on the cross as his moment of glory. It was at that moment that the presence of God in Jesus shone brightest. It was the centurion, seeing the dying and battered body of Jesus, who said: “Truly this man is Son of God.”

So Paul makes no apology for all that he has done in Corinth. Quoting from Psalm 116, he says: “I believed, and therefore I spoke.” For him, there was no alternative.”We too believe, therefore we speak.” Like the Psalmist, he clearly proclaims his faith, affirming life within himself despite death and the life-giving effect of his experience upon the church.

“Knowing that the one who raised the Lord Jesus will raise us [Paul and his helpers] also with Jesus and place us with you in His presence.” Paul sees God presenting Paul and his companions together with the Corinthians to Jesus at the final parousia. We may note the strong expression of unity and reconciliation between Paul and the Corinthians in spite of the difficulties between them. As he says, “Everything indeed is for you, so that the grace bestowed in abundance on more and more people may cause thanksgiving to overflow for the glory of God.”

Whatever people might say or think of him, Paul had only one aim: the glory of God and that as many as possible should know and acknowledge Jesus as Saviour and Lord. Undoubtedly, Paul had his faults, glaring faults. And some of these faults must have rubbed some people the wrong way but, as he will say later, it is precisely because of these that God’s message shone out more clearly through him.

The same can be said of us. Let us learn to see our weaknesses not as obstacles but as opportunities.

Matthew 5:27-32

Sermon on the Mount (cont’d):

Today Jesus takes two more texts from the Old Testament to continue illustrating his attitude to the Law and its meaning.

Another of the Ten Commandments says: “You must not commit adultery” (Exodus 20:14). Adultery is here understood as a sexual relationship between two people at least one of whom is already married to someone else. But, for Jesus, for a man even to look at another woman with lust (he does not say whether either of them is married) is already to have violated the spirit of the commandment and the kind of relationship that he expects between people.

We would need to distinguish here between a man finding a woman particularly beautiful or attractive and, on the other hand, looking on her as an object for sexual gratification. Obviously, there is nothing wrong with the former. We might also add that what is said here of men applies equally to women. If women are not mentioned it is because in ancient society the initiative for sexual activity seldom was available to the woman.

This commandment, in fact, is not primarily about sexual acts; it is about the inviolable dignity of each person. It is about the deep respect that people ought to have for their own bodies and the bodies of others. Other people cannot be used simply for one’s personal pleasure or to satisfy one’s sexual appetites – not even in the secret recesses of one’s mind and heart.

Jesus puts the situation rather graphically. He says it would be better to go physically maimed through life rather than allow oneself be led into a situation where another person could be so dishonoured. In human beings, our sexual powers have a double purpose: to express a deep and genuine love between two people and for the procreation of new life.

Related to this, Jesus quotes from Deuteronomy (24:1): “Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a writ.” The original text reads as follows: “Supposing a man has taken a wife and consummated the marriage; but she has not pleased him and he has found some impropriety of which to accuse her; so he has made out a writ of divorce for her and handed it to her and then dismissed her from his house; she leave his home and goes away to become the wife of another man.” The text goes on to say that, if this woman then is divorced by her new husband, her first husband may not take her back “now that she has been defiled in this way. For that is detestable in the sight of Yahweh” (cf. Deut 24:1-4).

Two things seem clear: it is men who can initiate divorce and on the flimsiest of pretexts; it is the woman who is guilty of adultery by marrying another man, which is why she cannot be received back by her first husband. (So, most men would want to marry virgins and it explains the pathetic plight of the widow in Scripture.)

Jesus challenges both of these traditions. The Jews accepted divorce but Jesus is ruling it out. The only exception for a marriage to be dissolved is on the basis of porneia. There is much discussion on the meaning of this term but it seems that it refers to a special situation in Matthew’s community. Certain types of marriage between Jews were regarded as incestuous but were allowed in the case of a Jew marrying a Gentile. But Matthew is saying that in the case of a Gentile becoming a Christian (and marrying a Jewish convert), such exceptions would not be allowed and divorce should not take place. Jesus says further that a man who marries a woman who has been divorced commits adultery.

Jesus is first of all putting men and women morally on an absolutely equal level. He is making the marriage contract something to be taken very seriously with grave responsibilities on both sides. This issue will come up again later (Matt ch. 19) and cause some dismay among Jesus’ disciples.

In our day, the whole question of marriage and the family is fraught with serious problems. Among them are divorce and adultery, although the problems here are somewhat different from that of Jesus’ time. The kind of divorce that Jesus speaks about is of a unilateral decision by a husband who wants to be rid of his wife, often for trivial reasons. In modern society, it is more often the result of the painful breakdown of a marriage relationship. While emphasising that nowadays each case must be treat with great pastoral sensitivity, we do need to remind ourselves of the fundamental values and attitudes that Jesus is underlining in this passage.

Week 10 | Saturday

2 Corinthians 5:14-21; Matthew 5:33-37

Paul continues in his own defence. If his behaviour seemed objectionable it was simply because he was acting in and through the Lord. But he speaks in a spirit not of antagonism but of reconciliation.

He tells the Corinthians of the force that is behind everything he does and says.”For the love of Christ impels us (caritas Christi urget nos), once we have come to the conviction that one died for all; therefore all have died. He indeed died for all, so that those who live might no longer live for themselves but for him who for their sake died and was raised.”

Christ’s love for us was so great that he gave his life so that we might have life.”This is the greatest love. . . to give one’s life for one’s friends.” But our response to that is for each one of us to die to all self-seeking and, like Christ and with Christ, give our lives in love for others. This is precisely what Paul is trying to do.

“Consequently, from now on we regard no one according to the flesh; even if we once knew Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know him so no longer.” The death of the man Jesus has produced a whole new way of seeing other people. A natural or spontaneous way of seeing people is replaced by a new way according to the Spirit. In another context, Paul speaks of how Jesus was seen by Jews and Gentiles as someone who was weak, powerless, foolish and mortal) but, to those with the eyes of faith, we see the wisdom, the power and the life of God. The paradox can be seen in himself. He is filled with the glory of Christ and yet appears so weak and vulnerable.

“So, whoever is in Christ is a new creation: the old things have passed away; behold, new things have come.” Rabbis used to speak of a ‘new creation’ to describe the effect of a proselyte or convert entering the Jewish faith or of the remission of sins on the Day of Atonement. The “new things” that have come are the new covenant which Jesus has inaugurated. The person baptised into the Christian faith and who lives according to the Gospel becomes, in a real sense, a new person, driven by a new vision of life.

“And all this is from God, who has reconciled us to himself through Christ and given us the ministry of reconciliation. . .”

“. . . namely God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting their trespasses against them and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation.” God does not count our wrongdoings. By responding to him in love we are seen as justified in God’s sight; this contrasts with the covenant that condemned.

This is Paul’s way of expressing the mission Jesus gave to his disciples after the Resurrection - “Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven” (John 20:23) and “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God”. The mission of the Kingdom is bring the people of the world together in truth, love, justice and peace. It is not just a question of ‘converting’ people to our ‘religion’ but ultimately of bringing them back into the loving arms of God. That is what life is about.

So we are ambassadors for Christ, as if God were appealing through us; we implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.” Paul sees himself as an ambassador of God’s reconciliation and, as God’s emissary, he begs the Corinthians to become reconciled to God.

“For our sake he made him to be sin, so that we might become the righteousness of God in him.” A very striking phrase and not to be taken literally. But in dying as a criminal on the cross and among sinners, he seemed to be one of them but in fact it was he who liberated us from sin, especially our own, and numbered us among God’s own people. Similarly, in Galatians we read: “Christ ransomed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: ‘Cursed be everyone who hangs on a tree’” (Gal 3:13). And in Romans: “By sending his own son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for the sake of sin, he condemned sin in the flesh” (Rom 8:3).

Paul does not deny that he has perhaps behaved in ways which angered some of the Corinthian Christians, perhaps the Jews among them most of all, but he sees no point in carrying on a vendetta. In the spirit of Christ, the only way forward is for peace and reconciliation.

Perhaps we could see if we are in a similar situation right now and how we can go about bringing healing to strained relationships. And, in general, our mission as Christians is to be agents of reconciliation wherever we find ourselves.”Blessed are the peacemakers; they will be called children of God.”

Matthew 5:33-37

Sermon on the Mount (cont’d):

Today’s third example of Jesus’ “filling out” the meaning of the Law is based on the instruction, “You must not break your oath, but must fulfil your oaths to the Lord.” In the book of Numbers we read: “If a man makes a vow to Yahweh or takes a formal pledge under oath, he must not break his word: whatever he promises by word of mouth he must do” (Numbers 3:30).

Jesus goes far beyond this requirement. He simply tells us to stop making oaths altogether. The true follower of Christ does not need to take oaths or to swear on anything, however sacred, to guarantee the truth of his words.”All you need say is ‘Yes’ if you mean ‘Yes’, ‘No’ if you mean ‘No’.”

The Christian should be a person of known integrity. He can be taken at his word and no further guarantee is required. It is nice to be known as such a person. Truth should be our second name.

Sometimes, of course, people may not be entitled to the whole truth. In fact, honour may require us even to sacrifice our life rather than reveal something that might put another person in danger but we should never be guilty of positively deceiving another.

Week 11 | Monday

2 Corinthians 6:1-10

Continuing the defence of his ministry against critics among the Christians of Corinth, Paul speaks eloquently and movingly of his experiences in working for the Gospel.

Our reading is a single, long sentence in the Greek, interrupted by the parenthesis of v. 2, the quotation from Isaiah. The single main verb is “we appeal”. Paul is both exercising his ministry of reconciliation and tells how this ministry is carried out. He is saying that his message of reconciliation is being confirmed by the apostolic experience which he describes here.

He begins by calling on all to work together and that the grace and love of God, which Paul has opened up for them, be not be received in vain. One way of doing this is to become reconciled once again with him.

He quotes from the prophet Isaiah:

In an acceptable time I heard you,

and on the day of salvation I helped you.” (Is 49:8)

Right now, he tells them, is an acceptable time; the day of their salvation is right here. God is bestowing favour and salvation at this very moment as he addresses his letter to them.

The “day of salvation” is a concept that can be found in many parts of Scripture. It is described by the Jerusalem Bible in this way:

There is an intermediary period between the time of Christ’s first coming and his return. This period is the ‘day of salvation’, a time allowed for conversion; it is granted to the ‘remnant’ and to the pagans. Though the duration is uncertain, this time of pilgrimage may be regarded as being short and full of trials and sufferings which are a prelude to the glory to come. The end is at hand, the day approaches, and it is necessary to be on the watch and to use the time well that remains for one’s own salvation and that of others, leaving the final vindication to God. (edited, omitting many Scripture references)

By using this time well Paul is telling the Corinthians they can guarantee their being united forever with their Lord.

At the same time he denies that anything he has done or said can be seen as a stumbling block to their faith. He consistently acts in such a way that no fault can be found with his ministry and that of his companions.”In everything we commend ourselves as ministers, as servants (diakonoi), of God.” And that is confirmed by the list of experiences which follows.

Among the proofs of their sincerity is the great amount of suffering and trials they willingly undergo for the sake of preaching the Gospel. Nine items are listed: afflictions, hardships, constraints, beatings, imprisonments, riots when they were mobbed by angry and hostile crowds, long hours of work, deprived of sleep and food.

There is a paradox here in his pointing to experiences that would not normally be regarded as matters of pride and achievement but appear very differently when seen through the eyes of faith.

In spite of being so badly treated, he and his companions have proved their credentials as servants of God “by our purity, knowledge, patience and kindness; by a spirit of holiness, by a love free from affectation; by the word of truth and by the power of God; by being armed with the weapons of righteousness in the right hand and in the left, prepared for honour or disgrace, for blame or praise”.

The passage concludes with a series of seven paradoxes, a series of experiences which could not co-exist except in someone whose life was totally devoted to Christ and his Gospel:

Taken for impostors yet we are genuine;
obscure yet famous;
said to be dying and here we are alive;
rumoured to be executed before we are sentenced;
thought most miserable and yet we are always rejoicing;
taken for paupers though we make others rich;
for people having nothing though we have everything.

Paul perceives his life and work as a reflection of Jesus’ own. The last two examples are an illustration of an apparent contradiction that is characteristic of the true apostle. It is something that can be seen in the lives of people like Mother Teresa or Jean Vanier (of L’Arche).

What we see here is the special Christian experience of finding joy, happiness and peace in the midst of hardship, pain, rejection and persecution. This is the peace that Christ gives and which no human agency can take away. And, at the same time, it is the common experience that the living out of the Gospel of love and peace can engender such hatred and violence from those who feel threatened by the vision of Christ.

If we compare ourselves with Paul, most of us will find that we give up too easily in the face of criticism, that we expect that our efforts to be good Christians should be met with admiration and respect.

Paul was so convinced of Christ’s love for him that nothing that could happen to him could change that conviction. He found Christ present in every experience and his sufferings were for him only a privileged time to share in the sufferings of his Lord.

Matthew 5:38-42

Sermon on the Mount :

We continue Jesus’ interpretations of some commands of the Mosaic Law as he pushes that law to a higher level of understanding.

“An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth” is not, as it may seem to be saying, an encouragement to take revenge. It is part of what is known as the lex talionis by which punishment for an assault was to be restricted to not more than the suffering experienced. So Exodus 21:23-24 says: “You shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stroke for stroke.”

Jesus calls for a very different kind of response. He tells us to offer the “wicked man” no resistance. He makes the famous recommendation to turn the other cheek. If a man would take your tunic, give him your cloak as well. If someone asks you to go one mile, go two miles with him. Give to the one who begs and do not turn away a borrower.

It is not surprising that even in Christian circles not a great deal of time is given to this text. Is it to be taken literally? Are we really to allow people to walk over us and offer no resistance at all? I think the answer is both Yes and No.

For many in our “macho”-idealised world, turning the other cheek seems the ultimate in wimpishness and cowardice. It is certainly not the way of Arnold Schwarzenegger, Bruce Willis, Sylvester Stallone and countless other “heroes” on our cinema and TV screens. Can you imagine them turning the other cheek?

But Jesus did. During his trial before the Sanhedrin “they spat in his face and hit him with their fists; others said as they struck him, ‘Play the prophet, Christ! Who hit you then?’” (Matt 26:67-68). What was Jesus’ response? Silence. This was turning the other cheek. Was this weakness or was it strength? Which is easier to do under great provocation: to practise self-restraint and keep one’s dignity or to lash out in retaliation? By lashing out one comes down to the same level as one’s attackers. (This is quite different from self-defence.)

In another account of Jesus’ trial (John 18:22-23), after having given an answer to a question, “one of the guard standing by gave Jesus a slap in the face, saying, ‘Is that the way to answer the high priest?’ Jesus replied, ‘If there is something wrong in what I said, point it out; but if there is no offence in it, why do you strike me?’” Here Jesus does respond to the attack but on a totally different level. The physical and unreasonable attack on an unarmed person is actively responded to on the basis of reason and non-violence. Jesus is not a victim here; he is in control. And this is true of the whole experience of the passion. His executioners behave in the most barbaric way but he never loses his calm and dignity right up to the very end.

And that is why we worship him as our Lord and Master. He asks us to follow in his footsteps.

Revenge, in all its various forms, is the easier way, the more instinctive way but it is not the better way. The way of active (not passive) non-violence is, in the long run, far more productive, far more in keeping with human ideals and human dignity. We have more than enough evidence in our world of the bankruptcy of a never-ending cycle of violence and counter-violence. We see it in the Middle East, in Northern Ireland. Violence does not pay; revenge is not sweet.

The example of Jesus has been followed by a number of outstanding people in our own time. Gandhi in India, Martin Luther King, and Rosa Parkes who inspired him, in the US, Dietrich Bonhoeffer in Nazi Germany, Dorothy Day in the US, Jean Goss and Hildegard Meyer of the active non-violence movement in Europe. . . All of these people were actively involved in the correction of seriously unjust situations.

There is a striking scene in the film To Kill a Mocking Bird where the lawyer (played by Gregory Peck) has been defending a black man falsely accused of raping a white woman. As a white man himself the lawyer earns the hatred and contempt of his fellow-whites for defending a “nigger” they have already condemned as guilty. In this scene one of the townspeople approaches the lawyer and spits into his face. The lawyer stands there, says nothing, and slowly wipes away the spit. For the film viewer the contempt immediately shifts to the man who spat. The positive non-action of the lawyer reveals the smallness of his assailant.

Turning the other cheek is not at all a sign of weakness. It requires great inner strength, self-respect and even respect for the dignity of one’s attacker. Jesus is calling us a long way forward and upward from “an eye for an eye”.

Week 11 | Tuesday

2 Corinthians 8:1-9

Paul now moves on to a very different topic, namely, the question of collecting funds to help poorer communities, especially that of Jerusalem.

We are told in the Acts that the church at Antioch in Syria sent Paul and Barnabas to Jerusalem with material relief (Acts 11:27-30). Later, Paul organised a relief project for Jerusalem among the churches he had evangelised and founded. Chapters 8 and 9 of 2 Corinthians contain what seem to be two letters about this. In them, Paul not only urges the churches to give help but also lays out the deeper meaning of this exercise. It is both an act of charity and an expression of unity between the churches.

The first 24 verses of chapter 8, of which we only read 9 today, form a letter of recommendation for Titus and two companions, who are not named. The letter is written from Macedonia. (Thessalonica and Philippi, churches to which Paul addressed letters, were in Macedonia, a province lying north of Greece.) The letter begins, as we see in today’s reading, with some ideas on sharing and equality in the Christian community. Paul’s ideas on relieving people in need had been planted when Paul was with the community in Philippi but now he is expanding them to include help from several churches together to the mother church at Jerusalem.

In writing to the Corinthians, he presents them with the example of the Macedonians as a model of what ought to be happening in Corinth. In encouraging the Corinthians to be generous he puts before them the extreme generosity of the churches in Macedonia.

“We want you to know of the grace of God that has been given to the churches of Macedonia. . .”

The central theme of his message is expressed by the Greek noun charis, which is usually translated as ‘grace’ but also by terms like ‘favour’, ‘gracious act’, ‘gracious favour’ etc.

‘Grace’ can be described as ‘the experience of being loved by God’ or ‘God’s love tangibly experienced’. It may come as a direct gift from God or through another person or through some blessing which comes into my life. A closely related term is eu-charis-tia, normally translated as ‘thanksgiving’, that is, thanksgiving for the ‘graces’ received from God in so many ways but especially in the saving work of Jesus.

“. . . for in a severe test of affliction, the abundance of their [i. e. the Macedonians] joy and their profound poverty overflowed in a wealth of generosity on their part.”

Three key words appear in this sentence:

Test: (dokime) suggests being tried and found genuine.

Abundance: a word containing the idea of overflowing and excelling.

Generosity: the word haplotes has nuances which include both simplicity and sincerity. Here it designates singleness of purpose that manifests itself in generous giving.

The Macedonians have asked Paul insistently that they wanted to offer what they could spare and even more than they could afford in order to express their solidarity with their Christian brothers and sisters who were worse off than themselves. Paul emphasises the spontaneity of the Macedonians and the nature of their action. In this they were showing a true Christian spirit, where the community’s resources are shared with those in need. (The Corinthians do not seem to be quite so spontaneous and seem to need some pushing.)

The idea that there should be rich churches and poor churches was unacceptable and contrary to the spirit of the Gospel.

“They [the Macedonians] gave themselves first to the Lord and to us through the will of God.” On the deepest level their attitude is one of self-giving and solidarity with their brothers and sisters.

Through his colleague, Titus, who is in Corinth, Paul hopes that the Christians there will match the generosity of the Macedonians and even more.”We urged Titus that, as he had already begun, he should complete for you this gracious act also.” Apparently Paul had sent Titus to help with organising the collection.

The Corinthians are rich in many things, Paul tells them, perhaps with a taint of flattery, but he wants to emphasise that their wealth will not be complete until they are also rich in giving.”You have always the most of everything - of faith, of eloquence, of understanding, of keenness for any cause, and the biggest share of our affection - so we expect you to put the most into this work of mercy too.” He is not ordering them to give but, by giving the example of the Macedonians, is offering them a challenge and a test of the genuineness of their faith and love.

In the concluding verse of today’s reading Paul offers the Corinthians the example of Jesus in a beautiful turn of phrase which we could do well to pray over today: “Remember how generous the Lord Jesus was: he was rich but he became poor for your sake, to make you rich out of his poverty.”

There are scholars who think this is a reference to Jesus’ pre-existence with God (his ‘wealth’) and to his incarnation and death (his ‘poverty’) and they point to the similarity between this verse and the passage in the Letter to the Philippians: “Though he was in the form of God. . . he emptied himself. . .” (Phil 2:6-8). Others interpret the wealth and poverty as succeeding phases of Jesus’ life on earth: his sense of intimacy with God and then the desolation and the feeling of abandonment by God in his death (“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”, Mk 15:34). In either case, we think of the words of Isaiah: “By his wounds we are healed.”

In our own day we again think of someone like Mother Teresa who enriched many of us through her poverty and her freedom from any personal possessions.

Matthew 5:43-48

We come to the last of the six examples that Jesus gave as illustrations of how he brings the teaching of the Law to a higher and more perfect plane.

The saying that Jesus uses today, “You must love your neighbour and hate your enemy”, is not found as such in the Hebrew Testament. Rather we find in the book of Leviticus where it says, “You must not exact vengeance, nor must you bear a grudge against the children of your people. You must love your neighbour as yourself” (Leviticus 19:18). The wording here would seem to condone, however, acts of revenge against strangers and outsiders. And, in practice, as indeed is the case in many communities throughout the world, the saying of Jesus reflects the way many people feel is a justified way of acting. And, as we saw earlier on where Jesus spoke about anger, at least limited revenge was condoned in the phrase ‘an eye for an eye. . . ‘.

Again, Jesus turns things on their head with a saying which many people would find quite unrealistic, if not downright stupid. He tells us actually to love our enemies and to pray for those who persecute us. How can we be asked to do such a thing?

Yet, if we would only reflect a little, the advice of Jesus makes a great deal of sense and, in fact, is really the only way to go for our own happiness and peace. Otherwise, as Jesus says, his listeners were no different from ‘tax collectors’, a group who, because they worked for the occupying power, were held in special contempt, or pagans, that is, people who lived God-less lives.

To understand what Jesus is saying we need to clarify two words, ‘love’ and ‘enemies’.

Who are our enemies? They can either be the people that we are hostile towards or the people who are hostile to us. The practising Christian who takes on board the teaching of Jesus will want to have positive attitudes to people in general and will not marginalise anyone on the basis of race, nationality, colour, class, gender or whatever. Such a person will not want to act in a way unnecessarily to create hostility in others. However, simply because we try to look and act positively towards others is no guarantee that they will act in the same way towards us. Through no objective fault of our own, we may become the object of their dislike, resentment, hatred, jealousy, anger and even violence. These are our enemies. And we are to love them.

What does ‘love’ mean here? The word that the gospel uses is a verb from the noun agape. Agape is a unilateral way of loving by which, irrespective of the actions or attitudes of another person, I desire their well-being. It is the love which God extends to every one of his creatures, irrespective of how they respond to him. In this it is quite different from the love which involves sharing, intimacy, affection and a strong element of mutual giving.

We are not being asked to love our enemies with the love of affection, to be in love with them or to be fond of them. That would not make sense and they would not want it. But we are asked to reach out and desire their well-being. This can be done when we focus our attention and our concern more on them than on ourselves.

When we are the objects of other people’s hostility we tend to go on the defensive and to generate negative attitudes towards the other. Our inner security (or insecurity) is under attack. Jesus is asking us rather to respond to the real situation rather than to react to spontaneous feelings.

When someone hates me, attacks me, is angry with me for no reason that I can think of, instead of feeling sorry for myself, I will reach out and ask, “What is wrong with that person? Why is that person acting in that way? What is bothering that person? Is there any way I can help to dissolve this person’s negative behaviour which is probably a sign of some inner self-hating or insecurity on their part?”

And certainly when I begin to think in this way, it becomes perfectly natural to pray for that person, to pray for their inner healing, for a restoration of peace and inner security. To hate someone who hates me, to be violent with someone who is violent with me, simply means that there are twice as many problems as there were at the beginning. By responding in the way that Jesus suggests, we end up with no problem at all!

And Jesus gives us another motive for acting in this way: it is the way God himself acts. He causes the hot, merciless sun to shine on the good as well as the bad; the cool, refreshing rain falls equally on the bad as well as the good. What Jesus is saying is that God’s love, his agape, reaches out indiscriminately to every single person, irrespective of their behaviour.

“You must therefore be perfect just as your heavenly Father is perfect.” Perfection here refers to that unconditional agape that God extends to every single person. If we are to grow into the likeness of God and give witness to his presence in the world, we need to act in exactly the same way. And wouldn’t it be a wonderful world if people followed Jesus’ advice? Far from being impractical, it is the only way to go.

Week 11 | Wednesday

2 Corinthians 9:6-11

Paul continues his exhortation to the Corinthians to be generous.

He begins with a kind of proverb: skimpy sowing means skimpy reaping.”Whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and whoever sows bountifully will also reap bountifully.”

He further adds that each one should make their donation according to what has been agreed but to do it without a long face or under a sense of compulsion.”God loves a cheerful giver.” As the Imitation of Christ says, It is the love of the giver more than the gift of the lover that counts.

And Paul further adds that the Source of everything we have will reward us generously for our generosity because he is, in fact, the original source of all that we give.”God is able to make every grace abundant for you, so that in all things, always having all you need, you may have an abundance for every good work.” So that the more we receive, the more we are able to share with others.

The behaviour to which he exhorts them is based on God’s own way of acting. God is capable of overwhelming generosity, as the quotation below attests, so that they need not fear being short. He will provide in abundance, both supplying their natural needs and increasing their inner goodness. Paul challenges them to a God-like generosity and reminds them of the fundamental motive for encouragement: God himself cannot be outdone.

He then quotes Psalm 112:

He scatters abroad, he gives to the poor;
his righteousness endures forever.

For “the One who supplies seed for the sower and bread for food will supply and multiply your seed and increase the harvest of your good deeds.”

In other words, “you are being enriched in every way for your generosity, which through us produces thanksgiving to God”. This is the paradox: the more we give of what we have and are to others, the more enriched we become. When everyone gives, everyone gets.

Matthew 6:1-6,16-18

We move today to a different theme, namely, the way in which we are to pay our worship to God.

Jesus’ teaching is based on the three basic acts of religion expected of a devout Jew - almsgiving, prayer, and fasting. In each case, Jesus warns his disciples not to indulge in any form of ostentation so as to attract the admiration of others.

He presents exaggerated images of how we should not do things in the way of ostentatious hypocrites. He speaks about people who blow trumpets in the streets to draw the attention of everyone when they give alms to the poor. He speaks about hypocrites who say their prayers in the most conspicuous places so that people will marvel at how holy they are. He speaks about people putting on gloomy and drawn looks so that everyone will know that they are fasting. In fact, Jews were only expected to fast on one day in the year, namely, on the Day of Atonement but the practice of regular fasting had become more common in Jesus’ time.

All this, Jesus says, is no worship of God but a kind of self-advertisement. Such people, he says, get their reward, namely, the admiration of the onlooker but it is not the reward that comes from acts of genuine worship.

When his disciples pray or fast or give alms they should do it in such a way that their actions will be directed entirely to God and not to themselves. We do remember earlier in the Sermon on the Mount that Jesus said that people should be able to see the good works of his disciples but then the purpose was not that they would be praised but that people would be led to glorify God.

As a rider to this passage we should point out that Jesus’ recommendation that we pray in private where only God can see us is not to be interpreted as meaning that it is not necessary for us to take part in forms of community prayer, which Jesus himself would have done whenever he attended the synagogue or went to the Temple. It would be a gross misreading of this text to argue, as people sometimes are heard to do, that it is not necessary to attend Sunday Mass because “I can pray equally well in the privacy of my home”. To speak in such a way is to misunderstand completely the essentially communal nature of the Eucharistic celebration.

Week 11 | Thursday

2 Corinthians 11:1-11

In our last three readings from 2 Corinthians we enter a final section of the Letter where Paul vigorously defends his credentials against people who have been criticising him. There is a unity in these chapters which suggest they may originally have been part of a separate letter. They consist of an apologia by Paul, defending his way of acting and his ministry. The language is highly emotional and very strongly expressed in parts. In the central part, there is a very emphatic statement on his credentials to be an apostle.

As he did in the early part of the letter, which we saw last week, Paul continues defending his record with the Corinthians, though in much stronger terms. Today’s reading is relatively mild.

He begins by appealing to the Corinthians to put with his foolishness, which, he feels does not disqualify him from being an evangeliser. Just before this he had said: “It is not the one who recommends himself who is approved, but the one whom the Lord recommends” (10:18). Clearly, he feels that he has this mandate unlike those others he is criticising, who do not have such a mandate and yet whom the Corinthians seem to tolerate.

He feels like a jealous parent or matchmaker: “I am jealous of you with the jealousy of God, since I betrothed you to one husband to present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.” The “jealousy of God” reminds one of the prophets who describe God as being jealous when his people dally with other gods and who would try to take his covenant people away from him. Where the relationship between God and his people is likened to a marriage, where Israel is Yahweh’s bride.

Similarly, Paul, like a father, has betrothed the Corinthian community to Christ as his bride. But they are now dallying with teachers who are not true matchmakers and who will not lead them to their true Spouse, Christ.

But, just as Eve was deceived by the cunning of the serpent, Paul is afraid the Corinthians are being seduced from a sincere and pure commitment to Christ and are becoming unfaithful to their marriage with Christ.

For if someone comes and preaches another Jesus than the one Paul and his companions gave them, or if they receive a different spirit from the one they originally received or a different gospel from the one they first accepted, they seem to be quite ready to go along with it. Those “other preachers” are seen as doing the seductive work of Satan and the Corinthians are flirting with teachings which are not part of the tradition which Paul gave to them.

But Paul feels that he is in no way inferior to what he calls “super-apostles”. They seem to be people who have come from outside and regarded by Paul as intruders. They also seem to have won support from at least some of the community and this may be because, compared to Paul, they were much more persuasive as speakers and orators. It is possible that they had appealed to the authority of the church leaders in Jerusalem and even had letters of recommendation from them. The church in Jerusalem was very Jewish and it may not have understood the very different conditions prevailing in the pluralist situation in Corinth, where Jews and Gentiles formed one community.

They seem, in fact, to be the same kind of people who were causing so much trouble among the Christians of Galatia where there were movements to restore observance of the Jewish Law not only among Jewish Christians but even among Gentiles as well. The fact that, in tomorrow’s reading, Paul strongly affirms his own credentials as a Jew indicates that these ‘super apostles’ belonged to this group.

However, Paul is not attacking the Jerusalem leaders, whose authority and credentials he acknowledges. He is rather attacking the ‘super-apostle’ intruders who are not like the ‘pillars’, the ‘foundation stones’ in Jerusalem but are self-appointed. They see themselves as superior to Paul as apostles and ministers and this may be strengthened by the good reception they have received from at least some of the Corinthian community. For Paul, however, they are “false apostles”, seductive ministers of Satan masquerading as apostles.

The intruders are ‘super-apostles’ not in the sense of the ‘pillars’ at Jerusalem but in their own estimation. They consider themselves superior to Paul as apostles and ministers of Christ, and they are obviously enjoying some success among the Corinthians. Paul rejects their claim to be apostles in any superlative sense (hyperlian), judging them bluntly as “false apostles”, ministers of Satan masquerading as apostles of Christ. On the contrary, as we will see in tomorrow’s reading, Paul himself will claim to be a super-minister of Christ on the basis of his record.

When it comes to proclaiming the Gospel, Paul admits that he may not be as good a speaker as they are, but he yields nothing to them in knowledge. (Was this weakness the distressing ‘sting of the flesh’ he mentions later on?) And he has made this clear to the Corinthians “in every way”. In other words, in all their contacts with him he has been passing on to them the Word of God which has been revealed to him. Even in his life experiences, the death and life of Jesus are being revealed. His opponents can make no such claim.

Paul now moves to another reason for complaints against him - his custom of preaching without any remuneration.”Did I make a mistake. . . because I preached the Gospel of God to you without charge?” Did that make him look like a freelancing amateur? One feels there is an element of sarcasm here and perhaps a jibe at his opponents who may have expected “fees” for their work.

He preached without remuneration because his expenses were covered by other churches he had already evangelised. He says he even “plundered” other churches by accepting help from them in order to give his services free to the Corinthians. And, when he was among them and in material need, he asked nothing from the Corinthians. Members of Christian communities in Macedonia came down all the way to Corinth to take care of Paul’s needs. He refrained then and he will continue to refrain from burdening them now.

“By the truth of Christ in me,” he says, “this boast of mine shall not be silenced in the regions of Achaia.” Achaia is the province in the south of Greece in which Corinth was situated.

And why will he do that? Because he does not love them? “God knows I do!” Surely his desire not to burden them in any way is proof enough of that. He rejects any lack of affection as his motive (possibly imputed to him by his opponents) and states his real motive, which is to emphasise the disparity between himself and the others.

Paul’s experience has been repeated many times in the history of the Church (and of other churches). People are often only too eager to hear some novel message, some new way of explaining the Gospel, especially if it is accompanied by a lot of razzmatazz.

The same goes for some devotional movements in the Catholic Church today which attract large numbers of people but which are not true to the core message of Christ - the establishment of the Kingdom.

Matthew 6:7-15

Sermon on the Mount:

Into yesterday’s passage on how we are to worship God through prayer, alms and fasting, Matthew puts a related piece of teaching how we ought to pray. This clearly seems to be an insertion and today we deal with it separately.

Jesus tells his disciples not to pray like many of the Gentiles. They go in for long prayers, hoping that eventually God will hear them. That is quite unnecessary, Jesus says, because our Father already knows our needs before we ask. If that is the case, why then should we bother praying at all? We do not pray to tell God what he already knows; we pray so that we will realise more deeply our needs and our total dependence on him.

Jesus then goes on and tells his disciples how they should pray. He teaches them, in effect, what we now call the Lord’s Prayer, or the ‘Our Father’. We have become accustomed to reciting this prayer very often - at every Mass, whenever we say the Rosary and at many other times.

The prayer in this form (Luke has a shorter version) contains seven petitions. Seven is a favourite number for Matthew. In listing the genealogy of Jesus he divides it into three lists of seven (chap. 1); there were probably seven Beatitudes in the original text (chap. 5); there are seven parables of the Kingdom (chap. 13) and forgiveness is to be offered not seven times but 77 times (chap. 18); there are seven ‘Alas’ when denouncing the Pharisees (chap. 23). Finally, the gospel itself is divided into seven main sections (Infancy, five discourses, passion).

The text of the Lord’s Prayer should not be seen as just a formula for vocal recitation. It is, rather, a series of statements and petitions in which we affirm our relationship with God, with the people around us and with the world in general. It is a statement of faith and it is, as we shall see, a highly challenging and, therefore, even rather dangerous prayer.

Let us take a brief look at the petitions one by one.

1, Our Father:

The challenge and the danger begin right in the first two words. We address God as Father, the source of life and of everything that we have; we have nothing purely of our own. But God is not just ‘Father’; he is ‘our’ Father. And that ‘our’ includes every single person who lives or has ever lived on this earth; not a single person can be excluded.

In addressing God as ‘our Father’ we are acknowledging that every human person, including myself, is a child of God and therefore that we all belong to one huge family where we are all, in a very real way, brothers and sisters to each other. There is no room here for rejection, or hatred, or prejudice or contempt of any kind based on race, nationality, colour of skin, gender, sexual orientation, social class, religion. . . If I am not prepared to accept every single person as a brother or sister, I will have problems even beginning to say this prayer.

2, May your name be held holy:

Other forms are ‘Hallowed be thy name’ or ‘Holy be your name’. Of course, God’s name is holy no matter what we say or think. We make this prayer for our sake more than for his. Here we are praying that God’s name be held in the deepest respect by people everywhere. That is not the case: some people despise his name and others do not even know it. We pray that the whole world will know God’s name, which is to say, to know and recognise God as their God and Lord, their Creator and Conserver and the final end of their lives on this earth. It is, in fact, another form of the next petition.

3, Your kingdom come:

We have already spoken about the nature of the kingdom. It might be more accurate to say, ‘Your kingship come’. In other words, we pray that every person in our world may put themselves consciously and willingly under the kingship and lordship and the love of God. We do this, above all, by our working together to make this world the kind of place that God wants it to be - a place of truth and love, of justice and peace, of sharing and caring. In one sense, of course, God is Lord irrespective of our relationship to him. But it is clearly his will that people, on their part, should accept that loving lordship as the centre of their lives. And that is the work of the Church and of every single Christian, indeed of every person anywhere - to help people recognise the kingship and lordship of God and to accept it as the key to their present and future happiness.

4, Your will be done on earth - as in heaven:

This, in a way, is simply another way of saying what we have already asked for in the previous two petitions. For that is the will of God that people everywhere recognise the holiness of his name and submit themselves gladly to his kingship and lordship in our world. We do that most effectively by identifying totally with the mission and work of Jesus to bring life, healing and wholeness to our world. To do the will of God is not simply to throw aside what we want and accept God’s will even when it is totally contrary to our own. We are only fully doing God’s will when we can see clearly that what he wants is always what is the very best for us. And we are only fully doing his will when we fully want what he wants, when our will and his will are in perfect harmony. Then we do what he wants and we do what we want. We are praying here to reach that level of oneness.

5, Give us today our daily bread:

It does not look like it but this also is a highly dangerous prayer for us to make. First of all, we are only asking for what we need now. Later in the Sermon on the Mount Jesus will tell us not to be anxious about the future. We are asking for what we need today; tomorrow is another day. We take care of one day at a time.

But there is one little word here that is highly dangerous. It is the word ‘us’. Who is that ‘us’? Just me and my immediate family? or my parish? or my neighbourhood or my town or my country? Surely it is the same as that ‘our’ in the first petition - it includes every single person. I am praying, therefore, that every single person have bread to eat today. We know, of course, that there are millions of people (some of them in rich countries) who do not have enough to eat or who suffer from malnutrition and poorly balanced diets. In praying that all of ‘us’ have our daily bread, are we expecting God to drop manna from the skies or are we not reminding ourselves that the feeding of brothers and sisters is our responsibility? If people are hungry or badly fed, it is not God’s doing; human beings are responsible in most cases (outside of natural disasters).

This petition prayer can also include the Bread of the Eucharist. But in sharing that Bread together we are saying sacramentally that we are a sharing people and we will share our goods and blessings with others, especially those in need. Otherwise our Eucharist becomes a kind of sacrilege.

6, And forgive us our debts, as we have forgiven those who are in debt to us.

Again is this not another dangerous prayer to make? We are asking that God’s forgiveness to us be conditional on our readiness to forgive those we perceived to have hurt us in some way. That is a daring thing to do. And forgiveness does not simply mean uttering a few words. Forgiveness in the Scripture always includes reconciliation between offender and offended. In fact, I would go even further and say that the fully Christian person is never offended, cannot be offended. The true Christian has a rock solid sense of their own security and their own inner worth which no other person can take away. When such a person is the recipient of some attack, be it verbal or physical, their first response is to reach out to the attacker with concern and sympathy. It is the attacker who has the problem, not the one attacked. Most of us have a long way to go to reach that level of inner peace. ‘If what you say about me is true, I accept it; if it is false, then it is false. Why should I take offence?’

7, And do not put us to the test, but save us from the evil one (or from evil).

In the end, we acknowledge our weaknesses and our total dependence on God’s help. We pray that we will not find ourselves in a situation where we fall seriously. We ask to be protected from the powers of evil with which we are surrounded.

Some texts conclude with “For yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory for ever. Amen”, which is used by many Christian denominations and is now included in the Catholic Eucharist after the Lord’s Prayer but separated by a prayer for peace. It is believed that this conclusion, not found in most MS. , was introduced for liturgical reasons.

Finally, in addition to simply reciting this prayer in the rapid way we normally do, we could sometimes take it very slowly, one petition at a time and let its meaning sink in. Or we could just take one petition which is particularly meaningful to us at any time and just stay with it until it really becomes part of us.

Week 11 | Friday

2 Corinthians 11:18,21-30

Paul continues to defend his credentials over against those ‘super apostles’ he felt were misleading the Christians of Corinth. Apparently they were boasting of their qualifications, so Paul feels he must do the same and he is confident their record is no match for his own.

He begins by pointing to his own impeccable Jewish credentials. It looks as if that was just what the ‘super apostles’ were trying to do at Paul’s expense. On several occasions in his Letters Paul appealed to his Jewish past.

But he can match their credentials - and even more. Like them he is a Hebrew, an Israelite, and a son of Abraham. Elsewhere he tells that he was even a Pharisee. In other places, Paul distinguishes authentic from inauthentic heirs of Abraham. Here he allows his opponents to claim descent from Abraham but only to emphasise the claim that immediately follows. He even allows them to call themselves ministers, servants of Christ, because he has further credentials which they cannot come near matching.

He goes on to describe what his ministry of Christ has involved. The long list of trials and hardships are what he has been prepared to undergo in the service of his humiliated and crucified Lord. There is no way his opponents can match this level of service and dedication.

For the sake of Christ and for the preaching of the Gospel he has been through far more than any of them - far greater labours, far more imprisonments, far worse beatings and numerous brushes with death. There follows a long list of hardships, sufferings, dangers - all the result of his unstinting efforts to get the message of Christ through to people. Apart from what Paul enumerates here, there is no other record of these hardships in the New Testament.

He mentions:

- Five times receiving 39 lashes (the legal limit) from the Jews

- Three times beaten with rods

- Stoned once

- Three times shipwrecked

- A night and a day waiting to be rescued at sea

- Frequent journeys with dangers from rivers, from robbers, from his own people, from Gentiles

- Dangers in cities and in the wilderness

- Dangers at sea

- Dangers among brothers who proved treacherous

- Toil and hardship

- Sleepless nights

- Hunger and thirst

- Frequent fastings, which may have been voluntary or involuntary

- Experiencing cold and exposure.

On top of all that there were his concerns about the well-being of the churches. He has always totally identified with their problems - “Who is weak and I am not weak, who is led to sin and I am not indignant?”

Finally however, if he really must boast, he will boast of his weakness. We will see more about that weakness in our final reading tomorrow.

He knows his rivals cannot match this record of dedication and self-sacrifice and his total commitment to the needs of his people. He can match them on every other level but they can come nowhere near him in what he has been prepared to suffer for the sake of the Gospel. He offers this as proof of the genuineness of his apostleship over against what he sees as preachers of novelty.

Paul’s list is highly impressive and very few of us has been called or will be called to make anything like the same sacrifices for the living and sharing of our Christian life. But perhaps we could do more than we have done so far and be more ready to undergo some inconveniences for the sake of Christ and those who are hungering for his Word.

We can ask ourselves the threefold question:

What have I done for Christ?

What am I doing for Christ?

What will I do for Christ?

Matthew 6:19-23

Sermon on the Mount (continued):

This short passage contains two related teachings.

The first may seen as a commentary on the petition in the Lord’s Prayer, ‘Give us this day our daily bread’. It is a teaching about the things which are really valuable, which really count. We live in a highly materialistic world where a very large number of people seem to believe that material wealth is the solution to every problem. There is nothing that money cannot buy, no problem it cannot solve. This belief prevails even though every day it is shown to be false.

Jesus urges us to put our trust and our security in something less perishable, something more lasting. To ‘store up treasure in heaven’ is not just to pile up a whole lot of ‘good works’ which will be to our credit in the next life. That credit too can be very quickly lost. It is much more a question of growing more and more into the kind of person who is steeped in the values and the outlook of the Gospel. It is less a question of doing than of becoming. We also build treasure by what we give away, by sharing with others whatever gifts we have, especially those most in need.”As long as you do it the least of my brothers you do it to me.”

And, as Jesus so wisely says, ‘where your treasure is, there will your heart be also’. Obviously, the question for me to ask today is: Where is my treasure? What do I value most in life? And how do I reveal that in the way I live?

And that brings us to the second part.

“The lamp of the body is the eye.” That is to say, what I see with my inner eye determines everything else about my life.”If your eye, that is, your vision is sound, your whole body, that is, your whole being will be filled with light. But if your eye is diseased, your whole body will be all darkness.”

It is that light which we need in order to have a clear vision of what is most valuable in our lives. The person who cannot see beyond money, status, power, or fame is truly in darkness. Life is not about getting these things. Life is about who we are; it is about love and relationships.

Let us pray today for vision and light and to be able to discern what are the real treasures, the most precious things of human living. Our Christian life is above all a vision of life.

Week 11 | Saturday

2 Corinthians 12:1-10

We come to the final reading from this letter as Paul continues to defend his credentials as an apostle of Christ to the Corinthians.

“I must boast,” he says. Not because it does any good in itself but because he sees it as the only effective way to counter the claims of his opponents.

He has spoken about the terrible sufferings and hardships he has been through and now he speaks of tremendous mystical experiences which brought him to unutterable heights of intimacy with God. Like most mystical experiences, he tells us that they cannot be adequately explained in human words.

Speaking of himself in the third person, he speaks of someone who, fourteen years previously, had been caught up to the “third heaven”. It was such an intense experience that he is not sure whether it took place inside or outside his body.”Caught up” suggests an ecstatic experience. This same person was caught up into “Paradise” and heard things which it is impossible to put into words or perhaps to divulge. This is the experience that many mystics - Teresa of Avila, John of the Cross, Ignatius Loyola, for instance - have described.

The reference to a ‘third heaven’ reflects the cosmologies of the ancient world which pictured a multi-tiered universe. Jewish literature in the immediate pre-Christian era had much speculation about the number of ‘heavens’. The usual number is seven but the Testament of Levi speaks of three and spoke of God in level three. This seems to be the model Paul envisages. In any case, Paul seems to indicate a spiritual journey to a non-earthly environment in which God revealed to him certain secrets.

Now, however, he does not want to boast about that person; instead he prefers to speak about his weaknesses. These experiences were not a personal accomplishment because they were so clearly the work of God in him. By referring here to himself in the third person he is emphasising the distance between that experience and his ordinary life. And his use of passive verbs also points to his passivity and receptivity in the experience. He boasts of them as a blessing from God rather than a personal achievement or something he earned. At the same time, they do indicate a special closeness to God which his opponents would not be able to claim.

So he prefers to boast of his weaknesses, weaknesses which were so obvious to those who knew him and these were entirely his own. He could boast about the “abundance of revelations” because they are the truth but he will not because people might have a higher opinion of him than he really deserves. Instead he will speak about his weaknesses. No one will question these because they are all too obvious!

So, in case he might have been tempted to feel superior because of these mystical experiences, he was given a “thorn in the flesh”, which he calls “an angel, a messenger of Satan”. This negative experience helps to give him a sense of balance. There is much discussion about the nature of this “thorn in the flesh”.

The term ‘thorn in the flesh’, like the English ‘thorn in the side’, usually refers to persons so it is very possible that Paul is speaking either of one person who has been particularly critical of him or of the group of ‘super apostles’ who have ridiculed him for his poor speaking ability and generally poor presentation. The main reason for his distress is that he saw it making his work of proclaiming Christ less effective.

Whatever it was, like his Master before him in the garden, he begged his Lord three times to liberate him from this cross - an indication of how it hurt him. As in the case of his Lord, his prayer was answered not quite in the way he intended - with a firm ‘No’. Yet it was, as in the case of Jesus, an answer and a clear indication of God’s will. He was told: “My grace is enough for you; my power is at its best in weakness.” In other words, God’s power is given most fully and manifested most fully by Paul remaining with his weakness.

Great man that he is, Paul fully accepts this. He realises that all he accomplishes will not be attributed to him, because of his transparent faults, but to their original Source - the Lord he loves and serves so faithfully.

Far from regretting or concealing these faults, he now even boasts of them. He had seen them as an obstacle to his apostolic work but now, after his prayer, he understand that they only make the power of Christ working through him more obvious.”I will rather boast most gladly of my weaknesses, in order that the power of Christ may dwell with me.” These weaknesses include the apostolic hardships he must continue to endure, including strong personal hostility as listed at this point.”Therefore, I am content with weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions and constraints - for the sake of Christ.” Paradoxically, it is through these weaknesses and shortcomings that the power of Christ is most visible in his evangelising work.

And he concludes, “For it is when I am weak that I am strong.”

There is much for us to pray and reflect on here. How sensitive we are to our faults and weaknesses and what efforts we make to hide them from others! How often we blame God for the pains and aches of life!

Paul was only concerned about one thing, namely, that the Gospel of Christ be proclaimed. If that could only be done by his weaknesses becoming known to the world, so be it. We need to have the same spirit.

Matthew 6:24-34

Sermon on the Mount (continued):

We continue with Jesus’ teaching on our attitude to material and visible things.

We have to make a choice between the vision of life that Jesus offers or a preoccupation with money and possessions. They are not compatible. They involve conflicting goals in life and different visions of what is most important in life. The truly materialistic person may have a veneer of Christian practice but cannot be a really committed Christian and vice versa.

Jesus preaches what St Ignatius Loyola calls ‘indifference’ to material things. Obviously some material things - like food and clothing and shelter - are necessary to daily living. At different times other things will be necessary too.

The attitude of ‘indifference’ is not that one does not care; on the contrary, one cares very much. But one cares to have things and to use things only in so far as they are needed to love and serve God and others for his sake. Jesus urges us to liberate ourselves from worry and anxiety about our body and material things such as food and clothing.

To be concerned about food because right now I am very hungry and do not have any is very different from worrying whether I will have food next month; to be anxious about what is happening when I am in intensive care is very different from wondering how long my health will hold up in the coming years; to be fretting because I have no money to pay my rent with the landlord knocking at the door is very different from wondering whether I will ever be rich.

Worry and anxiety about the future are a waste of time and energy yet we indulge in them so much. We are invited to look at the birds of the air and the flowers in the field. They do nothing except be themselves and God takes care of them. And how beautiful they are! When their time comes they pass away.

We are often so busy regretting the past or worrying about the future that we never get to enjoy life. Enjoyment and happiness are only in the present. Nowhere else. If we keep looking forward or looking back we will never find happiness. And yet it is right here in our grasp at every moment of every day. As Fr Tony de Mello used to say, “You have everything you need right now to be happy.” How our lives would be transformed if only we could really believe that! Because happiness can only be in the NOW. Yesterday’s happiness is gone; tomorrow’s does not exist. If I am not happy now, I never will be.

So, to follow the advice of Jesus today, “Do not worry about tomorrow: tomorrow will take care of itself.” God is in the here and now and nowhere else. He is always available.

Week 12 | Monday

Genesis 12:1-9; Matthew 7:1-5

First Reading (Genesis 12:1-9)

Today we return to the Book of Genesis. We have now left behind the mythological pre-historical stories of Creation and the Fall and the early developments of mankind with their own theological meanings. We now move into an area of what we can call dateable history, about 1,800 years before the Christian era.

Starting with chapter 12 we enter on the real beginnings of the history of Israel proper. The rest of Genesis deals with the so-called ‘Patriarchs’ – Abraham, his son Isaac, his son Jacob, and his 12 sons with special attention to the second youngest, Joseph. These 12 sons will be the patriarchs from whom all the Israelites are descended. The book ends with the word ‘Egypt’. That introduces us to the next book, Exodus, which opens – at a much later date – with the Israelites living in slavery in Egypt where they have been since the time of Joseph.

The two opening chapters of this section of Genesis, chapters 12 and 13, come from the ‘Yahwist’ tradition, although there are some editorial additions from the ‘Priestly’ tradition.

What we begin reading today represents the beginnings of the history of the Jewish people.

The story begins with Abram (later to be called Abraham) the founder father of Israel.

Although we have now moved into the region of history it does not mean that everything described is a newspaperman's eyewitness report. We are still very much in the area of legend and myth. These are stories which were told and retold to succeeding generations to give them a sense of pride in themselves as a people. Undoubtedly there are areas of fact which archaeology findings often confirm.

At the end of chapter 11 we are told that Terah brought his son Abram with his childless wife, Sarai, out of Ur in Chaldea, their ancestral home in what is now southern Iraq, with the intention of going to Canaan but when they reached a place called Haran, they settled there. Haran was in northern Mesopotamia (now part of Iraq).

Our reading today begins with a call from God to Abram, now living in Haran:

“Go forth from the land of your kinsfolk and from your father’s house to a land that I will show you.” Abram is being told to leave the settled world of the post-Babel nations and begin a pilgrimage with God to a better world of God’s making.

Yahweh then makes his first great promise to Abram: He will make Abram the father of a great nation; he will make his name great. There is a promise of blessings on all who bless him and a curse on all those who curse him. And “all the communities of the earth shall find blessing in you”. The original Hebrew promise can be understood to read as: “All nations shall bless themselves through you” (i.e. in blessing someone they will say, “May you be blessed as Abraham was”) or “All nations shall be blessed in you”. The former understanding is the more likely. Altogether the word “bless” or “blessing” occurs five times in this promise of Yahweh.

The blessing has a seven-fold structure:

1, I will make you into a great nation.

2, I will bless you.

3, I will make your name great.

4, You will be a blessing.

5, I will bless those who bless you.

6, Whoever curses you I will curse.

7, All peoples on earth will be blessed through you.

God’s original blessing on all mankind would be restored and fulfilled through Abram and his offspring in various ways and degrees. These promises were re-affirmed to Abram, Isaac and Moses. The seventh promise is quoted in Acts 3:25 with reference to Peter’s Jewish listeners, Abram’s physical descendants, and in Gal 3:8 to Paul’s Gentile listeners, Abram’s spiritual descendants – among whom we are also included.

Putting his trust in God’s word, Abram left Haran and set out for Canaan and brought his nephew Lot with him. Prompt obedience, grounded in faith, characterises Abraham all through. He cuts off all earthly ties and sets out for an unknown land. It will be the first of the great acts of faith and trust in God’s word which will make Abraham a model of faith for future generations. It will be renewed when the promise is repeated in chapter 15 and really put to the test when God asks for the surrender of his only legitimate son, Isaac, on whom the fulfilment of the promise depends.

To Abraham's unquestioning act of faith the chosen people will owe its very existence and destiny (Heb 11:8-19). Not only Abraham's physical descendants but all who, in virtue of this same faith, become his spiritual descendants will have their share in that destiny as Paul shows (Rom 4; Gal 3:7). We count ourselves among them.

So, in obedience to the Lord’s call, Abram leaves Haran and sets out for Canaan, bringing with him his wife Sarai, his brother’s son Lot, all the possessions they had accumulated between them (mainly flocks and herds), and the “persons” they had acquired in Haran. These “persons” would include slaves and retainers forming part of the extended household of Abram and Lot. One gets the impression that they were very prosperous.

When they reached Canaan, they went as far as “the sacred place at Shechem, by the terebinth of Moreh”. The terebinth or turpentine tree is native to the Mediterranean region. It yielded probably the earliest known form of turpentine, said to have been used as medicine by the ancient Greeks. A famous sanctuary was located at Schechem in central Canaan and a large tree was often a conspicuous feature at such holy places.

The Canaanites were living there but God had promised the land would in the future go to Abram and his descendants.”To your descendants I will give this land.” It is worth noticing that at this stage Abram did not have a single son or daughter by his wife Sarai so the issue of descendants was still only based on a promise.

But it is on the basis of this promise that Abram and his descendants claimed a sacred right to this land as their home. In the course of time, the original inhabitants, the Canaanites, would come to symbolise an idolatrous people who did not recognise the lordship of Yahweh and did not deserve to keep the land as theirs.

In acknowledgement of God’s promise, Abram built an altar “to the Lord who had appeared to him”. This was the first of several that Abram would erect at places where he had special spiritual experiences. From there Abram moved to hill country to a place between Bethel on the east and Ai on the west. Bethel lay just north of Jerusalem and was an important town in the religious history of God’s people. Only Jerusalem is mentioned more often in the Old Testament.

Here, he built another altar and dedicated it to the Lord. Then he was on the move again and went by stages to the Negeb, the semi-desert area in southern Palestine.

The virtue for which Abram (Abraham) would become a model later on was his deep faith and trust in God's promises, however unlikely they were of being fulfilled. Both Paul in his letters (especially Romans) and the Letter to the Hebrews put him forward as a model for all believers.

It begins with his answering God's call to leave the familiarity of his homeland and settle down in an unknown territory with which his people had no former connection.

This faith in God’s providential care is something we too need to cultivate. God can call us too to strange places and situations. He sometimes asks us to leave the familiar and take risks with the unknown. Sometimes it takes the form of a ‘vocation’ or calling to a particular way of life – inside or outside the Church.

Many people, however, it would seem, decide on their life’s work first and only then ask God what he wants them to do.

Gospel (Matthew 7:1-5)

Sermon on the Mount (cont'd):

We begin today the last chapter of the Sermon on the Mount.”Do not judge, and you will not be judged”, that is, by God. This is a good example of Matthew using an impersonal passive voice to avoid mentioning the name of God which is understood. Another example is where he has Jesus say, “Whose sins you shall forgive, they will be forgiven” [by God].

Jesus today touches on an issue in which very few of us can claim innocence – passing judgment on others. Sometimes we call it gossip which seems harmless enough and very often it is relatively harmless. And yet at times we can spend a long time tearing other people apart, revealing to others information about people which they do not need to know. What Jesus says is so true. We focus on a tiny speck in someone else's eye while there is a large plank in our own.

In fact, that is probably why we are so fond of indulging in this exercise. Our purpose is not so much to bring another person down as to bring ourselves up. Often those we judge are higher placed than we are or more gifted or more educated. To some extent unconsciously, we feel inferior. One way to even things up is to bring them down, to reveal their feet of clay.

But, as Jesus says, this is a kind of hypocrisy. Given our own faults, what right have we to sit in judgement on another? So often our judgements are based on the purely external or on incomplete evidence. We condemn acts while being quite ignorant of the motives behind the acts. Only God is in a position to make an accurate judgement of a person's strengths or weaknesses.

Linked with all this is the fact that, nine times out of ten, we would never make our criticisms face to face. This, on the one hand, is a form of cowardice and, on the other, proves our hypocrisy because we make no effort to help the person make the changes we would like to see. It might be a good resolution for us to promise only to criticise people to their face and then in a non-judgmental fashion. And to give them an opportunity to express their side. Sometimes we will find that our criticisms are without real foundation or we will find the person grateful for drawing attention to something they were unaware of.

And removing that plank from our eye is another way of saying that, before we make any evaluation of another, we need to be sure that our view is totally free from any prejudice or bias. We do have a serious responsibility to draw attention to things that people do wrong, especially if others or they themselves are hurt, but it is a responsibility we often shirk. Gossiping behind their backs is so much more fun. But, in the long run, it helps no one.

Week 12 | Tuesday

Genesis 13:2,5-18; Matthew 7:6,12-14

First Reading (Genesis 13:2,5-18)

The virtue of Abram is further highlighted in this passage.

As we could gather from yesterday’s reading but is explicitly confirmed in today’s, Abram was rich in livestock but also in silver and gold. Lot also was the owner of extensive herds and tents. Their combined possessions were so great that the land they occupied could not support both of them together. The region around Bethel and Ai did not have enough water or pasture for such large flocks and herds.

The result was that quarrels broke out between each one’s herdsmen over land for grazing. The problem was aggravated by the fact that Canaanites and Perizzites were also still living in the area. Abram then with total generosity suggests they divide the land between them. Abram, always generous, gives his young nephew the opportunity to choose the land he wanted. He himself would not obtain wealth except by the Lord’s blessing.

Lot takes what seems the better and more fertile land of the Jordan Plain as far as Zoar. The area indicated is the sunken river valley reaching to the south of the Dead Sea. Zoar was at the southern end of the Dead Sea, which is conceived as not yet existing at the time to which the story refers. When Lot chose it, it was rich and fertile. It was “like the Lord’s own garden or Egypt”. Because of its abundant and dependable water supply, Egypt came closest to matching Eden’s idyllic conditions. Ominously, the writer adds: “That was before the Lord had destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah”, which were cities in the territory.

In fact, archaeology has confirmed that, prior to the cities’ destruction, the now dry area east and south-east of the Dead Sea had ample water and was well populated.

The rest of the territory Lot left to Abram.

For his selfishness Lot will later pay a high price. Because of the notoriously immoral cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, devastation and barrenness will come, leading to the formation of the Dead Sea.

Abram stayed in the land of Canaan, with Lot settling among the cities of the Plain, pitching his tents near Sodom, whose inhabitants “were very wicked in the sins they committed against the Lord”. Lot chooses a life of ease but in a region where immorality flourishes; for this he will be heavily punished. But the generosity of Abraham in leaving his nephew the choice will be rewarded by a renewal and enlargement of the promise we saw in yesterday’s reading.

After Lot has left for his chosen territory, God tells Abram to look in every direction and all the land he can see will be given to him and his descendants for ever. Though still without an immediate heir, God tells him: “I will make your descendants like the dust of the earth”, no more capable of being counted than specks of dust. Abram is told to walk the length and breadth of the land which God is giving to him and his descendants forever.

So Abram moves his tents and his herds to settle near the terebinth of Mamre, at Hebron, to the west of the Dead Sea. And there – for the third time since leaving Haran – he built a temple to the Lord.

The stage is now set for important developments in the story.

Yesterday, we saw the great faith and trust that Abram had in God; today we see his generosity. In both qualities, there is a message for each one of us.

Gospel (Matthew 7:6,12-14)

Sermon on the Mount (cont'd):

Today’s passage contains three apparently unrelated teachings of Jesus. Vv. 7-11 on prayer, which intervene, are omitted. (We need to remind ourselves that the Sermon on the Mount is not a verbatim record of a “sermon” preached by Jesus. It is a highly edited collection of sayings on the general theme of the qualities to be found in a true disciple of Jesus.)

a, “Do not give to dogs what is holy.” That is, consecrated meat from animals sacrificed in the Temple should not be given as food for dogs. We need to remember that for the Jews (as for the Muslims) dogs are unclean animals, so that is an extra reason for not giving them meat consecrated for purposes of divine worship. We may remember the remark of Jesus to the Syro-phoenician woman about not giving the food of children to dogs, a reference to Gentiles who were also thought to be unclean. Or the humiliation of Lazarus in Luke’s parable who was so helpless that he could not prevent dogs licking his sores.

Similarly something as precious as pearls should not be given to pigs, another unclean animal. Again we remember in the parable of the Prodigal Son, how after hitting rock bottom the only job he could find was to feed pigs and he was so hungry he would have eaten the pigs’ food.

In other words, Jesus is advising his followers not indiscriminately to expose their beliefs to all and sundry. While, in one sense, the Christian way is for all there are people who are not ready to hear it and will not just reject it but subject it to ridicule. This would especially apply to certain Christian practices such as the celebration of the Eucharist or other sacraments. We do not accept people into the Catholic community except after a long period of formation and initiation. Faith in Christ is a gift and not everyone receives it at once.

b, The second saying is the famous ‘Golden Rule’, which is not exclusive to Christianity or the Gospel. It is known in other cultures. What might be emphasised here is its being expressed in positive terms. There is also a negative form, ‘Do not do to others what you would not like them to do to you’. There is a difference between the two. You can observe the negative maxim by doing nothing at all. The positive can only be observed by doing some good action to others and is therefore much more in line with the general teaching of Jesus.

c, The contrast between the narrow gate and the wide road. To follow the wide road is to do just about anything you feel like doing. It is to follow your likes and dislikes, your instincts and whims wherever they lead you. That is going to include following roads of greed and self-centredness, of lies and deceit, perhaps even of violence and hurt. It is clearly not a way of life.

The narrow gate is not to be narrow-minded. It is rather to be very clearly focused on certain very specific ways of thinking and acting, having one's life guided by a clear set of truths, principles and values, those truths, principles and values which form the core of the Gospel's teaching. In other words, the Way of Christ. It is a way that leads to life.

It is a hard road only in the sense that it requires discipline and it is true that relatively few people find it. In the long run it is the easier way because it conforms more to the deepest needs and desires of the human person. (It is important to be aware that the Way of Jesus is not an eccentric choice of lifestyle, one religion among many, but that it is in total harmony with all that human life is meant to be.) But there is no doubt that the wide undisciplined road is the easier one to follow even though in the long run it does not bring happiness.

Week 12 | Wednesday

Genesis 15:1-12,17-18; Matthew 7:15-20

First Reading (Genesis 15:1-12,17-18)

Here we have the first of the formal covenants between God and Abram and later between God and the Israelites.

It begins with a general promise from God in a vision to Abram:

Fear not, Abram!
I am your shield; your reward will be very great.

“Shield” here signifies “King”.

“Fear not!” is a phrase repeated again and again throughout Scripture.

But it does not reassure Abram. He has heard these promises already but so far nothing has happened. What good are all God’s blessings if Abram remains childless and without an heir and has to bequeath his property to his steward, Eliezer? “You have given me no offspring, so one of my servants will be my heir.” It is known that in Mesopotamia a childless man could adopt one of his own male servants to be heir and guardian of his estate.

But God reaffirms his former promise: “No, that one (Eliezer) will not be your heir; your own issue will be your heir.” He tells Abram to look up at the night sky and try to count the stars, if he can. His descendants will be just as numerous. It is said that on a clear night 8,000 stars can be seen in a Middle Eastern sky but, for most people, it means a number beyond counting.

And, in spite of the unlikelihood of that happening, “Abram put his faith in the Lord, who credited to him as an act of righteousness.” It is an act of trust in a promise which, from a human point of view, could not be realised. God then acknowledges that Abram’s act of trust is worthy of reward based on his ‘righteousness’, namely, on his integrity and humble submission to God, which makes a person pleasing to God.

Paul will use this text to prove that justification before God depends on our faith and trust in him and not on the external observance of the Law. At the same time, because Abram’s faith was the source of his carrying out God’s wishes, James in his Letter cites the same text to show that faith which does not result in good behaviour is ‘dead’. There is no contradiction here: we do not ‘earn’ salvation by the ‘good works’ we do or by observing regulations and laws but a genuine commitment in faith to God and his teaching naturally overflows into acts of love and care for others. Paul, then, makes Abram’s faith a model for all Christians (cf. Rom 4:1-25; Gal 3:6-9).

As an encouragement to Abram, God reminds him that “I am the Lord who brought you from Ur of the Chaldeans to give you this land as a possession.” But Abram is not fully convinced. He is living in this land but how can be sure that he will gain full possession of it?

Abram is then instructed to prepare to offer a sacrifice. He is told to bring animals from his flocks: a three-year-old heifer, a three-year-old she-goat, a three-year-old ram, a turtle dove and a young pigeon. At three years an animal was regarded as ritually mature.

The animals were cut in two and each half facing the other; the two birds, however, were not cut. Birds of prey came down on the dead animals but Abram drove them away. As the sun set, Abram fell into a kind of trance and “a deep, terrifying darkness” overcame him - a sure sign of the awesome presence of God coming down on him.

When the sun had set and darkness had fallen, a smoking brazier and a flaming torch passed between the two rows of animal offerings. As often in Scripture, the smoke and fire represent God’s presence. Although the text does not mention it, Abram may also have walked between the two rows of split carcasses, although it could be that God alone, as the one initiating a unilateral agreement, walked between them. As the Bible and also contemporary inscriptions make clear, agreements were sometimes ratified by walking between the divided pieces of animals. While they did so, the contracting parties would call down on themselves a fate similar to that of the slaughtered beast, if they should fail to keep their word. Here the two partners to the agreement are God and Abram although the chief initiator and implementer is God.

The covenant consisted of a promise to Abram to give him land in perpetuity – from the Wadi of Egypt to the Great River, the Euphrates. It was this covenant which would guarantee Abram’s possession of the land he was occupying but also a sign that the promise of an heir would also be fulfilled. We are very close now to that happening.

It is this total trust of Abram in God's promise which will be retold again and again down the ages and on into the New Testament (Paul’s letters and the Letter to the Hebrews).

In Jesus, of course, we have a new covenant and it is for us to be part of it. Let us pray for that faith and trust of Abram, when against all hope he continued to hope.

Gospel (Matthew 7:15-20)

Sermon on the Mount (cont'd):

Our reading contains a warning which must have been very relevant in the early Church but has not lost its meaning in our own day.

Prophets who are wolves in sheep's clothing. On the outside, they seem to have the image of Jesus, his gentleness and love, but in fact they are religious predators, using people for their own ends. There have been unfortunate examples of this in some so-called ‘televangelists’ who, in the name of the Lord Jesus, ripped off countless numbers of trusting people, many of them elderly and not well off, by making them pledge large sums money they could not afford.

How can you recognise them? By their ‘fruits’, by the way they behave and not just by what they say or the claims they make. It is not that difficult to separate the genuine from the false. As Jesus says, it is not possible for a bad tree to consistently produce good fruit nor for a genuinely good tree to produce bad fruit. Very often we have to admit that we try to make a good impression on people and we often try to hide from others what we believe to be our weaknesses.

Integrity and transparency are precious qualities to be found in any person and they are not easy to achieve. Most of us wear masks of some kind. Most of us can identify with the title of John Powell’s book – ‘Why Am I Afraid To Tell You Who I Am?’ In fact, people can often identify more easily with a person whose faults are admitted. They feel that they are dealing with the real person and not a phoney. This can apply very much to pastors and other religious leaders.

Jesus is calling on us today to be really genuine people. Take care of the inside and the outside will take care of itself.

Week 12 | Thursday

Genesis 16:1-12,15-16; Matthew 7:21-29

First Reading (Genesis 16:1-12,15-16)

In spite of God's promises, Abram is still without child by his wife, Sarai. But among her staff was an Egyptian maidservant, called Hagar. She may have been acquired while Abram was in Egypt (an anecdote not covered by our readings).

Sarai is aware of how she has disappointed her husband by not giving him a son and she attributes this to God’s action. She now makes a generous offer, suggesting to Abram that he have intercourse with her maid so that Abram can have sons through her. Hagar would act as a surrogate mother.

Sarai’s actions are all in keeping with the laws of the time, as known from ancient extra-biblical sources. According to Mesopotamian law an infertile wife could offer one of her female slaves to her husband and recognise the child born as one of her own. There will be a similar situation with Rachel, the wife of Jacob, and Leah, Rachel’s older sister who was also a wife to Jacob (cf. Gen 30)

So, after they had lived 10 years in Canaan, Sarai offers her maidservant Hagar as a concubine to her husband. The servant very soon becomes pregnant. As soon as she did so, she looked on her mistress with disdain and contempt. Although a mere slave, she was able to do what her mistress had not been able to accomplish. As mother to Abram’s long-wanted son she was not afraid of any reprisals from him.

Sarai then turns on Abram and blames him for Hagar’s behaviour.”You are responsible for this outrage against me.” She had generously given her maid to Abram and now that the maid is pregnant she has only disdain for Sarai.”May the Lord decide between you and me!” An expression of hostility or suspicion on her part.

Abram’s response does not sound very admirable to our ears today: “Your maid is in your power. Treat her as you think fit.” Taking him at his word, the jealous and grieved wife treats Hagar so badly that she flees the household.

She is found on a road by a messenger of God near a spring out in the wilderness at Shur. This is understood as a manifestation of God in human form and not – as angels are later understood – a created being distinct from God.

He asks her where she has come from and where she is going. She says she has run away from her mistress Hagar. The messenger tells her to go back to Sarai and to submit to her mistress’s abusive behaviour. In return, he promises that she will have descendants too numerous to count.

In addition the messenger tells her that she is in fact already pregnant. She is going to have a son and he is to be called Ishmael. This is in answer to her prayer. In fact, the name Ishmael means either “May God hear!” or “God has heard”.

However, this son is strangely foreseen to be “a wild ass of a man, his hand turned against everyone and every hand turned against him. He will encamp in opposition to all his brothers.” Away from human settlements, Ishmael would roam the desert like a wild donkey and the hostility between Sarai and Hagar will be passed on to their descendants. Ishmael's descendants will be the desert Arabs who are as intractable and vagrant as the wild ass (cf. Job 39:5-8).

Sure enough, Hagar bore a son for Abram, his father and the son was named Ishmael. Abram was eighty-six years old.

It is clear that this story represents a more primitive society with different social values. The having of an heir transcended any duties of marital fidelity, a fact which Sarai clearly acknowledged. Her primary responsibility as a wife was to produce an heir. Being a loving marriage companion was secondary to this.

Hagar's attitude to her mistress is certainly not commendable though it is understandable that a slave should feel good about being able to do something so important for her master which the mistress could not. Abram's attitude is not altogether commendable either. But he was simply recognising the superior status of his wife over a slave, even if that slave was to be (as he thought at this point in time) the mother of his heir. She was, in contemporary terms, “only” a surrogate mother, a baby-bearer.

In our own day, there is still a good deal of confusion over the status of wife and mistress. There are extremes all the way from reducing wives to the status of slaves to total amorality about sexual relations and everything in between. The victims all too often are the children of such relationships; here the seeds of future problems are sown and so the problem continues…

Gospel (Matthew 7:21-29)

Sermon on the Mount (cont'd):

We come today to the final reading from the Sermon on the Mount. Jesus spells out the essential quality of the true disciple. He or she is not to be measured merely by external activities.

It is not enough, for instance, to keep saying “Lord, Lord...” That by itself will not bring a person under the kingship of God. It will not be enough even to be able to perform wonders like casting out demons or working other miracles even in the name of Jesus.

The true disciple is someone who is totally united to God in heart, soul and mind. Such a person is one who listens to Jesus' words and carries them out. As we have said elsewhere, listening here means a number of things:

a. To pay attention to what Jesus is saying to us; to listen with attentiveness.

b. To understand what is being said. It is possible to listen without understanding.

c. To accept fully and to assimilate into one's being what one understands. It is possible to hear clearly, to understand clearly but not to accept or assimilate. Children do that all the time!

d. When we have fully assimilated as part of our own thinking what we have heard and understood, we will naturally act accordingly.

It is only when all this becomes a reality in our lives that we can say we are truly disciples of Jesus and, as he says, that is the only sure foundation on which to build our lives.

To live a Christian life only on the surface, that is, only with words and externally conforming behaviour, is like building a house on sand. Once we come under attack, we will collapse because we have no deep foundation inside. We see that happening frequently when people who have lived in an outwardly Christian environment move to a purely secular situation. They fall away very quickly. So let us be like that sensible man who builds his house on rock, the firm foundation that is Christ with the vision of Christ also the vision of our own life, a life built on truth and love.

With this we come to the end of the Sermon on the Mount. Matthew clearly indicates the end by saying, “Jesus had now finished what he wanted to say..” He adds that Jesus’ teaching made a deep impression on the people, mainly because he spoke with authority – “You have heard it said, but I say...”. That is, he spoke in his own name, unlike the Scribes who could only be interpreters of God's Law.

As mentioned at the beginning, the Sermon on the Mount is the first of five major discourses. It deals mainly with the qualities that are to be found in the individual follower of Christ. Let us pray that those qualities may be found increasingly in each one of us.

Week 12 | Friday

Genesis 17:1,9-10,15-22; Matthew 8:1-4

First Reading (Genesis 17:1,9-10,15-22)

The reading opens with God reminding Abram of their covenant agreement.” Walk in my presence and be blameless.” It is a call for Abram to maintain his faith and trust in God’s promises – yet to be fulfilled.

We have here another covenant narrative. The same covenant promises are confirmed which we saw in Wednesday’s reading but this time it not only lays down religious and moral obligations but also imposes circumcision as the badge of recognition for God’s people.

In intervening verses not included in our reading, God has also formally announced that Abram's name has been changed to Abraham (v.5), because it sounds like ab hamon, ‘father of a multitude’. For the ancients a name did not merely indicate, rather it made a thing what it was, and a change of name meant a change of destiny. Abraham is soon to be the father he long wanted to be.

Abram and Abraham, it seems, are in fact just two dialectal forms of the same name whose meaning is ‘he is great by reason of his father, he is of noble descent’. In this context, however, Abraham is interpreted on the strength of its similarity with ab hamon, ‘father of a multitude’.

God now speaks to Abraham:

Both he and his descendants are to observe this covenant down the ages. And, from now on, as a sign of the covenant, every male is to be circumcised.

The Jerusalem Bible comments:

Circumcision was originally a rite initiatory to marriage and to the life of the clan. Here it becomes a sign which, like the rainbow after the Flood, is to remind God of his Covenant and humans of the obligations deriving from their belonging to the Chosen People. Nevertheless, the legislative texts allude to this injunction only on two occasions (Exod 12:44; Lev 12:3). It is only at the Exile and after that it receives its full prominence, cf. 1 Macch 1:63; 2 Macch 6:10. Paul explains it as the “seal of the righteousness of faith” (Rom 4:11). On the ‘circumcision of the heart’, see Jer 4:4.

The origin of the custom of circumcision is likely to have been hygienic but, as in several of Israel's customs, it is given a divine sanction and a ritualistic significance which guarantees its observance. It then becomes a distinctive badge of the race. It was to be administered eight days after birth and was to be performed on every member of the household and even on outsiders and non-Jews bought (as slaves) and brought into the household. To be uncircumcised was to be seen in violation of the covenant. Where the foreskin has not been cut away, that man will be cut away from the community.”He has broken my covenant.”

Ironically, it has also become the badge of the followers of Islam, who borrowed it from their future nemesis, and who, in some places, have extended it to women as well.

Returning to our reading, God next formally announces to Abraham that his wife Sarai is henceforth to be known as Sarah. The two words are actually forms of the same name, meaning ‘princess’. Sarah is to be – a long way in the future, to be sure – the mother of kings.

And God says he is going to bless her and give Abraham a son by her. The son will also be blessed and will have many descendants and “rulers of peoples shall issue from him”.

Abraham’s response is to prostrate himself in deep reverence before God but at the same time he laughs.”Can a child be born to a man who is 100 years old? Or can Sarah give birth at 90?!” Abraham's laughter is a sign not so much of unbelief as of surprise at the extraordinary announcement.

Abraham’s laugh will be echoed later by Sarah, who laughed when she found her periods had stopped, a sign of her pregnancy – something she finds incredible at her age. She will laugh again after the birth with a feeling of vindication. Each is a play on the name Isaac, an abbreviation of the name Yshq-El which means “May God smile, be kind” or “God has smiled, been kind”.

Abraham also begs God that Ishmael, soon to be displaced as the true son, continue to be favoured. Mentioning Ishmael, up to now the heir-apparent to the Promise, is an implicit request for reassurance.

God again announces that Sarah will have a son and that he is to be called Isaac. The covenant made with Abraham will now continue with Isaac as an everlasting pact with his descendants forever.

Abraham’s appeal for Ishmael is also heard. He will be blessed and be fertile and have many descendants. He will be the father of twelve chieftains and they will become a great nation but they will be outside the covenant. The covenant, originally made with Abraham, will now pass to Isaac, who will be born within the coming year.

And our reading concludes with God leaving Abraham to his future.

That very day Abraham, his son Ishmael and all the males in his household are then circumcised according to the Lord's command. (This last is not included in today's reading.)

The issue of circumcision will become very contentious in the apostolic Church where Jewish Christians wished to have the custom continued. However, it will be seen as an excessive burden on Gentile converts and is soon dropped as a requirement. Later, Paul will emphasise that true circumcision is in the heart and not in an external operation.

Gospel (Matthew 8:1-4)

The two chapters (8 and 9) following the Sermon on the Mount include a long list, ten altogether, of miracles performed by Jesus. They are seen as a confirmation of his authority to teach because they are so obviously the work of God himself. The man who can do these things also has the right to be heard and followed.

The first story is the cure of a leper. It is told with the usual brevity and lack of detail characteristic of Matthew (compare Mark’s version, 1:40-45). A leper begs to be healed. His faith and trust in Jesus is revealed by his saying, “If you want to you can heal me.” Jesus replies, “I do want to.” And he cures him instantly. We may note the simplicity of Jesus’ act. In this, the healing miracles of Jesus contrast with the fantastic stories from the Hellenistic world and those sometimes attributed to Jewish rabbis.

But Jesus’ miracles also differ because of the spiritual and symbolic meaning attached to them. They often have the quality of a parable and frequently the words that accompany the miracle are of greater significance. As in this case, where the healing of the leper has wider ramifications as indicated below.

While compassion is often the motive behind a miracle, most often they are seen as strengthening a person’s faith. Jesus, too, is very selective in the miracles he performs and often demands secrecy from the beneficiary. Jesus does not want to be the centre of any sensational wonder-working. It will be the miracle of his resurrection that will be the really determining factor of Who he is.

Soon, we will see Jesus sending out his disciples to proclaim the Kingdom and giving them his own powers of healing. Their mandate will be to do the same work that Jesus has been doing. The 10 miracles recounted in chaps. 8 and 9 will be the kind of thing that the missionary successors of Jesus will also do.

After the healing, Jesus then he instructs the man, in accordance with the requirements of the law, to go to the temple to get a certificate from the priests as proof of his return to health. Only with this official documentation will he be allowed to re-enter society.

The leper was a particularly unfortunate person in ancient society. It was known that through contact with a leprous person one could contract the disease, so they were kept isolated from the rest of society. There was, of course, no known cure and the person's body just gradually rotted away.

What was probably more tragic was the fact that many people with other kinds of similar-looking skin diseases which were not at all infectious could be branded as lepers and condemned to the same policy of isolation.

The healing of the leper by Jesus was then much more than a physical healing. It meant that the man could be fully re-integrated into normal society.

In our time, the leper can be a symbol for all those who are marginalised by our societies for one reason or another – foreigners, people of a different colour or culture or religion, drug addicts, alcoholics, AIDS/HIV victims, gays and lesbians.

We Christians have a special responsibility to be agents of healing to re-integrate such people and accept them fully as brothers and sisters.

Week 12 | Saturday

Genesis 18:1-15; Matthew 8:5-17

First Reading (Genesis 18:1-15)

Another stage in the fulfilling of God's promise to Abraham.

The reading begins by our being told that the Lord visited Abraham by the terebinth (or turpentine tree) of Mamre, which was the site of his home, as he sat at the entrance to his tent. (For all his wealth and prosperity, Abraham still lives a nomadic life, as does Lot.)

In fact, he sees three men standing before him. And the text seems uncertain in its use of singular or plural for the visitors. A more primitive tradition seems to speak of only three men and leaves their identity mysterious. Abraham in speaking uses the singular but it is not clear whether he is speaking to all three in the singular or to one of them. Many of the Fathers saw a foreshadowing here of the doctrine of the Trinity, a doctrine that was revealed only in the New Testament. As later on, two of the men are described as ‘angels’, the third is taken by some to be Yahweh himself. Whatever interpretation is chosen, they clearly represent a special presence of God himself.

Abraham ran forward to greet them and bowed profoundly before them. Speaking in the singular (‘Sir’), he immediately asks them to accept the hospitality of his tent. At this stage his bowing to the ground is not religious adoration but simply a mark of respect to guests. At first, Abraham sees his guests as mere human beings and welcomes them warmly; their superhuman character is only gradually revealed.

He offers them water to wash their hot and dusty feet and suggests they take some rest under the shade of a tree. He also invites them to have some food and refresh themselves before continuing their journey. They accept his invitation.

The picture is one of typical Near Eastern hospitality which includes:

1, Giving prompt attention to the guests’ needs.

2, Bow low to the ground as a sign of respect.

3, Politely addressing the guest as ‘Lord’ and calling oneself ‘your servant’.

4, Acting as if it would be a favour to be allowed to serve them.

5, Asking for water to wash the feet of the visitors, much appreciated in a dry, hot and dusty climate.

6, Prepare a more than ordinary meal for them.

7, The host standing nearby in the attitude of a servant meeting their every wish.

Abraham then tells his wife, Sarah, immediately to bake some rolls of bread and he orders that a steer be prepared for eating. When all was ready, he offered his guests the meat of the steer with curds and milk and waited on them as they ate under the tree. The curds were a type of soft cheese or yoghurt.

The men then asked for Sarah. On being told that she was in the tent (women do not appear in the presence of men as they eat), one of them said that he would return in about one year’s time when Sarah would have a child. ‘One of them’ would indicate the speaker as being Yahweh himself, something Abraham begins to realise when he hears the prediction of a miraculous birth.”About this time next year” is literally “when the time becomes alive”, i.e. at the time when birth is due after the period of gestation; the conception is understood as taking place soon after the prediction.

Sarah, who was inside at the entrance to the tent, heard all this being said. She and Abraham were very old and Sarah had long before had her menopause. She laughed to herself at the thought of being a mother.”Now that I am so withered and my husband is so old, am I still to have sexual pleasure?” (We saw that Isaac, the name of her future son means ‘God has smiled’.)

But the Lord (in the person of the three men) asked Abraham why Sarah had laughed at the idea of becoming pregnant.”Is anything too marvellous for the Lord to do?” (Mary will hear similar words from Gabriel at the Annunciation.) Again he promises to return in a year’s time when Sarah will bear a son. Sarah then became afraid (she has begun to realise who the speaker is) and denies having laughed.”Oh yes, you did,” the Lord said.

That is the end of our reading. Immediately after this, the three men left and continued their journey to Sodom. Abraham, with true courtesy, accompanied them part of the way. Monday will find us in Sodom.

The reading is a lesson in courtesy and hospitality to the stranger and one to be taken aboard by every Christian. One never knows when God is present in a caller to the door. In fact, one can take it that he is present, one way or another, in every caller and should be treated as such.

Gospel (Matthew 8:5-17)

Today we read the second of the 10 miracles of Jesus described by Matthew after the Sermon on the Mount. It is a story also found in Luke and John but, strangely enough, not in Mark.

The significant element in this story is the fact that the person asking for help is a centurion, a soldier and presumably not a Jew. Yet he has this great faith in Jesus. It is a sign of the future role of Gentiles in the originally all-Jewish Christian community.

He asks Jesus to cure a servant who has become paralysed. Jesus immediately responds that he will go and cure him.”No, no,” replies the centurion.”I am not worthy that you should come to my house. Just say the word and my servant will be healed.” (Words very familiar to us from their paraphrase used in the prayers before sharing in Communion.) And he goes on to say that as an army officer, he just has to give commands and they are carried out on the spot. When it comes to healing, he knows that Jesus can do the same.

Jesus is astonished at the faith of this pagan: “Nowhere in Israel have I found faith like this!” And he foretells that this is a sign of what is going to happen in the future when Gentiles from all over the world will enter the Kingdom while many of Jesus’ own people will be left outside. What is more they will become God’s people sharing glory with the Jewish ancestors: Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. It is a sad theme running through the whole of this gospel: the rejection of Jesus by so many of his own people and their self-chosen exclusion from the Kingdom.

The faith that Jesus expects is not an acceptance of religious doctrines. It is rather an act of total trust and surrender by which people commit themselves to the power of God – in this case, the power of God in Jesus.”Christ asks for this faith especially when he works his miracles, which are not so much acts of mercy as signs attesting his mission and witnessing to the kingdom; hence he cannot work miracles unless he finds the faith without which the miracles lose their true significance.” (Jerusalem Bible, loc. cit. Text references omitted.)

For this reason this faith was not easy to give, especially for many of Jesus’ hearers who could not see the presence of God in Jesus and hence could not commit themselves to him. Even the disciples were slow to believe. We see this especially in Mark’s gospel. But, once present, such a faith can bring about the transformation of a person’s life, as many converts to Christianity can attest.

Turning to the centurion Jesus says, “Go back home; you have believed, so let this be done for you.” The servant was cured at that very moment.

What is clear from this story and from many other healings by Jesus is the crucial element of faith in the one approaching Jesus. It is the only condition necessary – racial origins are irrelevant. Luke will tell us that Jesus was restricted in the help he could give to the people in his home town of Nazareth because they simply did not have faith in him.

Let us pray that we may never lose that gift of faith which has, in the mysterious ways of divine Providence, been given to us. And let us remember that, without that faith, God will be hampered in reaching out his healing love to us.

Week 13 | Monday

Genesis 18:16-33; Matt 8:18-22

First Reading (Genesis 18:16-33)

For the next two days we read the story of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah.

As we begin the reading we see the three mysterious visitors of Abraham preparing to continue their journey to Sodom. As an act of courtesy on the part of a host, Abraham accompanies them on the beginning of their journey.

In parts of the Old Testament, especially in the Pentateuch, God is portrayed as having very human qualities and this is particularly revealed in the dialogues he holds with various people (e.g. when Moses pleads on behalf of the recalcitrant Israelites).

There is a delightful touch in today's reading. As Abraham is seeing off his mysterious visitors, one of whom is identified as God himself with two angels as companions, God wonders to himself whether he should reveal to Abraham his plan to destroy Sodom. He knows how good and compassionate a man Abraham is, almost more kind and compassionate than God himself! But Abraham is now an important person in God’s plans. He has become the head of a great nation and all the other nations will be blessed in him. So, in a way, he has a right to be privy to God’s intentions.

In fact, Abraham has been specially chosen to teach his sons and his posterity to follow closely the ways of the Lord by doing what is right and just so that the promises made to Abraham will be realised. And the very justice about what the Lord is planning to do is going to be questioned.

Now, while the two angels continue on their journey, the third man, who is the Lord, tells Abraham he must go down to Sodom and Gomorrah to verify the reports reaching him of their terrible immorality. Again, God is presented in human terms as needing to verify by a personal visit whether what he hears about these cities is true.

What was the terrible sinfulness of Sodom and Gomorrah? Israelite tradition was unanimous in ascribing the destruction of the two cities to their moral wickedness but there were different understandings of what this wickedness consisted.

According to the Yahwist account we are following here, the evil was in a request to have homosexual acts with the three visitors of Lot (one of whom, of course, was the Lord), giving us the word ‘sodomy’. Others, however, would see it rather as a sin of rape or a serious violation of traditions of hospitality. In order to protect his guests, Lot was even willing to give his unmarried daughters for the Sodomites’ pleasure. An act, which in our times might be regarded as morally even worse but which was by the standards of that age less evil than the abuse of hospitality.

In Isaiah, the perpetrators of social injustice are likened to the people of Sodom (Is 1:9ff). Ezekiel likens the immoral behaviour of his people to that of Samaria and Sodom and says his people’s record is even worse (Ezek 16:61) “You became more corrupt in all your ways than they”, cf. Ezek 16:46-51). Speaking of the idolatry and sexual immorality of Jerusalem, Jeremiah says, “To me they are all like Sodom, its citizens like Gomorrah” (Jer 23:14).

While two of the men (the angels) continue on their way to Sodom, the third, who is the Lord, stays behind with Abraham, who immediately begins to plead on behalf of Sodom.

Surely a God of justice will not wipe out the innocent with the guilty? Supposing there are as many as 50 good people in the city, will God destroy it? Abraham dares to tell God how he should behave! “Far be it for you to do such a thing, to make the innocent die with the guilty, so that the innocent and guilty would be treated in the same way!” And then the punch line: “Should not the judge of all the world act with justice?” It would be unjust to condemn the innocent, however few in comparison with the many sinners.

We have here the age-old problem of why the good should suffer along with and because of the wicked. The sense of collective responsibility was so strong in ancient Israel that the question does not arise whether the just might may be spared separately and individually. God will, in fact, save Lot and his family but the principle of individual responsibility does not appear until later (e.g. in Deuteronomy and the prophets).

Abraham’s argument, then, is that since all will share the same fate he asks that even a minority of good people would be enough to win pardon for all. Even so, Abraham’s request does not go below the number 10. Beyond that would be too much to ask for. But later we read in Jeremiah (5:1) that God would pardon Jerusalem if only one just person could be found and the same is implied in Ezekiel (22:30). Then, in Isaiah 53, it is the suffering of the one Servant which will save the whole race but this was not understood until it was seen fulfilled in the person of Jesus Christ.

God then agrees to spare the city, if he can find 50 good people in it. But, having got this concession, Abraham presses further, although he knows he is being very impertinent in speaking to his God like this.”See how I am presuming to speak to my Lord, though I am but dust and ashes.” But what if there are only 45 good people? No, the city would not be destroyed if 45 innocent people could be found. Abraham then continues his bargaining – 40? 30? 20? Even only 10? Each time God concedes and at the end replies: “For the sake of those 10 I will not destroy it.”

With that, the Lord leaves Abraham and continues on his journey to Sodom, while Abraham returns to his home. However, on the following day, he will go back to the place where he spoke with the Lord and where he could look down on Sodom and Gomorrah in the valley below.

Unfortunately, as we shall see, not even 10 good people could be found in the whole of Sodom.

Perhaps this would be a good time for us to reflect on the level of our own compassion with people who come into our lives. We may sometimes find ourselves doing the very opposite of Abraham, that is, condemning a whole group because of a small number of misbehaving people.

We do need more of Abraham's attitude of seeing as much good as possible in the world around us.

Gospel (Matthew 8:18-22)

There are times when Jesus goes out of his way to meet the crowds. On one occasion we are told he was filled with compassion because he saw them as sheep without a shepherd. But today, he gives orders to cross the lake apparently to avoid the crowds pressing in on him.

The crowds represent two kinds of people: those in real need of teaching and healing and those who are simply driven by a kind of curiosity for the unusual. Jesus is not particularly interested in the second kind; they represent a false interest in Jesus. For them he is just a sensation, a wonder-worker, ‘Jesus Christ Superstar’.

Similarly, when a scribe approaches Jesus and says, “Teacher, wherever you go I will come after you.” It seems like a generous offer but Jesus reminds the man of just what that may entail.”Foxes have lairs, birds in the sky their nests, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head.”

To follow Jesus means, like him, to be ready to have nothing of one’s own. As Jesus said earlier in the Sermon on the Mount, we cannot at the same time serve two masters. To be with Jesus is to accept a situation where we may have nothing in the way of material possessions. Our security will be elsewhere.

We do not know whether the scribe took up the challenge or not. It does not really matter. Jesus’ words are recorded mainly for us to hear them. What do I think when I hear them? Have I made the choice between having Jesus and having things? Or do I think I can have both? Do I want to have both?

Another person, described as being already a disciple, asks for permission to go and bury his father first before following Jesus. It seems a fairly reasonable request and Jesus’ reply sounds rather harsh.”Follow me, and let the dead bury their dead.” Both the Jewish and Hellenistic world regarded this as a filial obligation of the highest importance. (I knew a man who asked to delay his becoming a Catholic until he could give his father a Buddhist burial; in the event he never did become a Christian.)

There are two ways we can understand this reply. In one case, the man is asking to postpone his following of Jesus until his father dies and he can bury him. But to follow Jesus is to enter a new family with a new set of obligations. It is not that the man should not honour his father but, in the meantime, there are other things of much greater importance that need to be done. In the new family, of which his father is just one member, there are more pressing obligations. It is another way of Jesus letting us know that our following of him has to be unconditional. We cannot say, “I will follow you if...” or “I will follow you when I am ready...” When he calls we have, like the first disciples, be ready to drop our nets, our boats and even our family members.

Another way of understanding Jesus’ words is to see his call as a call to a way of life. Those who want to go their own self-seeking ways belong to the spiritually dead. Leave the burial of the dead to them. The rituals of society, including burial, have their place, an important place but for Jesus the call to the Kingdom represents a commitment to a more important set of values.

We must put all these statements in their context. They make clear that following Jesus involves a radical commitment but it does not mean that that we act in ways that are inhumane or unreasonable. Soon after Peter and Andrew had abandoned their boats and their nets to follow Jesus, we find Jesus in their house tending to their mother-in-law who had fallen sick (Mark 1:29-31). There was a time when some religious sisters were not allowed to attend a family funeral. That has now changed – and rightly. At the same time, the call of Jesus still involves a total commitment.

Week 13 | Tuesday

Genesis 19:15-29; Matt 8:23-27

First Reading (Genesis 19:15-29)

In today's reading we move to the destruction of the two cities of Sodom and Gomorrah as a punishment for their terrible immorality.

Omitted is the scene when the two men, who are now being called ‘angels’ (Greek angelos, meaning ‘messenger’) and who represent God's own presence, are offered hospitality in Lot's house.

It is while they are there that that all the men of Sodom, both young and old, come demanding to “know” (in the sexual sense) the visitors. Rather than abuse his solemn obligations of hospitality Lot offers his two virgin daughters instead. To our way of thinking today, it was a strange and horrifying offer but it shows that the demands of hospitality even outweighed other personal considerations. (For an even worse example of the same, cf. Judges 19:24-25.) In the end the men of Sodom are dazzled by a blinding light so that they cannot find their way into the house.

The men/angels warn Lot of the coming catastrophe and urge the family to flee at once. But, when he makes the announcement to his family, Lot’s sons-in-law refuse to take him seriously. Their scepticism will seal their doom. (Is it also a device to exclude non-relatives of Abram being saved?)

At dawn the following morning, the angels again urge Lot to leave with his household unless he wants to share the fate of the two cities. But Lot is still hesitant. Is he reluctant to leave behind all his wealth and prosperity?

But the men took Lot by the hand together with his wife and two daughters and forcibly brought them to a place outside Sodom. This is seen as an act of God’s mercy and it might be noticed that only the direct relatives of Abram are so rescued; the in-laws are left to their own devices.

Once outside the city Lot is told to flee the Plain where the cities are and take to the hills. Again, Lot is reluctant to do what he is told.”Oh, no, my lord!” he cries (using the singular). He says that the visitors have already shown great kindness by saving his life and he is afraid to go to the hills for fear some disaster might overtake him. Perhaps he is afraid of being attacked and robbed in uninhabited places. He suggests being allowed to take refuge in another smaller city which is not far away and where he would be safer.

The man (only one is mentioned) grants this concession and promises that this city will not be destroyed. But again, he urges Lot to get there as quickly as possible “for I can do nothing until you arrive there”. This city, we are told, was called Zoar, a word related to the Hebrew misear, meaning ‘a trifling thing’. The town lay to the south-east of the Dead Sea. In the Roman period another earthquake occurred and the town was flooded; it was rebuilt higher up the shore and inhabited until the Middle Ages.

By now the sun is already up. And at that moment fire and sulphur rained down from heaven on Sodom and Gomorrah. The two cities were destroyed and all the Plain with them, including all the inhabitants and all plant life. According to the commentaries, it is usually understood that the cause was volcanic, that it was a huge earthquake. This would naturally be accompanied by a disastrous fire, especially in a region containing bitumen and its accompanying gases. The text enables us to locate the catastrophe in the southern part of the Dead Sea. The subsidence of the southern half of the Dead Sea bed is known to be recent as geologists reckon, and the whole district is still geologically unstable. The doomed towns were, besides Sodom and Gomorrah, Admah and Zebolim.

It was understood by the sacred authors, of course, as punishment for the terrible immorality of Sodom and Gomorrah and bears resemblance to the story of the Flood, where just one family, loyal to Yahweh, survived.

As Lot and his family fled, his wife, who disobeyed the order not to look back, was turned into a pillar of salt. Now only three people have survived – Lot and his two daughters (who had a double escape). The southern end of the Dead Sea features colossal salt pillars and perhaps one of them suggested the appearance of a woman and hence the legend.

Meanwhile, Abraham went early in the morning to the place where he had spoken with the Lord and looked down on Sodom and Gomorrah below. And “he saw the smoke of the land going up like the smoke of a furnace”. From the height east of Hebron, Abraham could easily see the region at the southern end of the Dead Sea, where the Cities of the Plain were probably located.

And so it was, says Genesis, that when God destroyed the Plain and the two cities, he remembered Abraham and rescued Lot from the midst of the destruction, by overthrowing the cities where Lot had made his home.

Our reading today concludes with the suggestion that Lot being saved was less for his own sake than for the sake of his uncle, Abraham. Earlier, when they were dividing the land between them, it had been suggested that Lot had made a less wise and more selfish choice in picking that area. He had now lost it all.

As we saw in yesterday’s reflection, there is much discussion now about the real sin of the people of Sodom. Traditionally it has been seen as a condemnation of homosexual acts. Such acts were considered an abomination by the Jews.”The man who lies with a man in the same way as with a woman: they have done a hateful thing together; they must die, their blood shall be upon their own heads” (Leviticus 20:13). These acts are part of a longer list including examples of incest, bestiality, and sexual relations with close relatives. All are strictly forbidden and some involve the death penalty for the perpetrators. These acts were regarded as typical of the surrounding Gentile peoples and were not to be imitated (Leviticus 20:23).

Others however would see the sin of Sodom as the violation of the respect due to visitors, a sin against hospitality. Hospitality towards strangers has almost a sacred character among the people of the Middle East. This is seen in Lot's readiness even to offer his daughters to the lust of the townspeople rather than dishonour his visitors.

Today, too, we would distinguish between homosexual acts and the orientation. This distinction was unknown until relatively recent times. Formerly, all homosexual relationships were seen as a perversion of a person's nature, a violation of it. Now, with better psychological understanding, we know that a minority of men and women are so constituted that they are sexually attracted primarily to people of their own gender.

The Church emphasises that, while condemning homosexual acts as immoral, the orientation is not culpable and people inclined in this way should not be the subject of discrimination.

Gospel (Matthew 8:23-27)

Yesterday we saw Jesus telling his disciples to get into a boat to cross to the other side of the lake of Tiberias. Before he left, there were two men who asked to be disciples and we saw how Jesus dealt with them.

Now, as they crossed the lake a storm suddenly blew up. It seems this is a common feature of Lake Galilee. Actually the word that Matthew uses for ‘storm’ should be translated ‘earthquake’. It was a word commonly used in apocalyptic literature for the shaking of the old world when God brings in his kingdom and the Synoptic gospels use it in describing the events leading up to the final coming of Jesus. It indicates that there is more to this story than just a narrative.

While waves crashed into the boat Jesus remained fast asleep. In great fear, the disciples woke up him, “Lord, save us! We are lost!”

Jesus was not very sympathetic.”Where is your courage? How little faith you have!” Then he stood up and rebuked the wind and sea. There immediately followed a complete calm. The disciples were awestruck and, in a way, were more afraid than ever. A storm they could understand but not what they saw Jesus doing.”What sort of man is this that even the winds and the sea obey him?”

In their book, only one person could have this kind of power and that was God himself. Their question contained its own answer. It was a further step in their realising just who Jesus their Master really was.

We can, however, read another meaning into this story. We can understand it as a kind of parable about the early Church, the Church for which Matthew is writing. It was a Church consisting of many, small scattered communities or churches. They were surrounded by large, pagan and often very hostile peoples.

Each little church community must have felt like those disciples in the boat with Jesus surrounded by a large expanse of water. Sometimes that water got very angry and threatened to engulf their boat. At the same time, Jesus their Lord seemed to be very far away; he seemed to be asleep, unaware and uncaring of their plight. The fact that in the gospel today they address him as “Lord” would indicate that the story is points more to their present situation as isolated communities in a very uncertain world.

Then they would come to realise that Jesus really was with them and that he did care a lot. And peace would come back to them again. But the peace would be in their hearts; the sea around them might be just as stormy as ever.

This is something for us to learn. Most of the time we can do very little to change the world around us or change the people who bother us. Maybe we have no right to make them change. But we can change; we can learn to see things in a different way; we can learn to be proactive instead of reactive.

Above all, we can learn to be aware that God is close to us at all times, that he does know, that he does care, that, instead of taking things away, he helps us to go through them and keep our peace.

Week 13 | Wednesday

Genesis 21:5,8-20; Matt 8:28-34

First Reading (Genesis 21:5,8-20)

At last God keeps his promise and Sarah, old though she is, bears her one and only son, the son through whom the promises to Abraham and his descendants will be kept. Abraham himself is exactly 100 years old.

The child Isaac grew and on the day that he was weaned Abraham threw a large feast. Weaning took place in the ancient Near East between the ages of two and three.

However, when Sarah saw her son Isaac playing with his half-brother, Ishmael, the son of Hagar, the maidservant, she became very angry. (Ishmael should have been in his mid teens by this time.) She had not forgotten how Hagar had mocked her for sterility and not being able to give Abraham a son. She was also afraid that, if the brothers got too close, it would affect Isaac’s share of the inheritance. In fact, he will get everything. The word “playing” here is another allusion to Isaac’s name, where the verb means ‘to laugh’ or ‘to play’.

She tells Abraham to get rid of both Ishmael and Hagar. She does not want Ishmael to share any of the family inheritance with Isaac. Abraham was very unhappy with this because he saw Ishmael as a real son whom he loved. But also according to law and the customs of the day the arbitrary expulsion of a servant girl’s son was forbidden and, especially as in this case, where the father is the head of the household.

However, God tells Abraham to follow Sarah’s demands because Isaac and only Isaac is to be the father of future descendants. At the same time, Ishmael, the son of the slave woman, will become a patriarch in his own right as a token of honour for Abraham, his father.”I will make a nation of him also, because he is your offspring.”

On the following day, Abraham sent Hagar off with her son and a supply of bread and water – in view of Abraham’s wealth only minimal provisions. She left with her boy and wandered in the wilderness of Beer-sheba. (There is an impression in the story that Ishmael and Isaac are the same age which cannot be the case.)

When the water ran out, she put her son in the shade of some bushes and then went to sit down some distance off.”Do not let me look on the death of my child.” And she wept. It was the second time she had got this treatment.

The boy too must have been crying because an angel spoke to Hagar from heaven.”Do not be afraid, because God has heard the voice of the boy… Come, lift up the boy and hold him fast with your hand, for I will make a great nation of him.” “God has heard” is a play on the meaning of Ishmael’s name.

As she opened her eyes, there nearby was a well. She filled her waterskin and gave the boy to drink.

And now, says Genesis, God was with the boy Ishmael. He grew up, living in the wilderness and became an excellent huntsman, an expert with the bow. In the next verse, not part of the reading, we are told that Hagar got an Egyptian wife for Ishmael. She herself, we remember, had been brought from Egypt by Abraham. But this marriage only confirms Ishmael and his descendants as outsiders and leaving the field to Isaac.

We are seeing here, of course, the evolution of the Israelite people told through the eyes of the sacred authors.

Certainly not everything in this story would meet with our approval today, neither the mockery of Sarah's barrenness nor the sending away of Hagar. We are dealing with a much earlier society where many of the values which we take for granted had not yet developed in people's consciousness. But we also have to acknowledge that these values have not been appropriated by everyone in our own societies.

We have only to think of the millions of people who have been driven from their homes and are without even the basic necessities of living. Most of these situations are the result of human (inhuman) behaviour.

Gospel (Matthew 8:28-34)

Matthew's version of this strange story is quite different from and much shorter than Mark’s. It is usual for Matthew to pare down stories just to the essential details while Mark tends to give a more dramatic presentation. In Matthew's version, too, there are two possessed people instead of just one. (Similarly in his version of the Bartimaeus story told by Mark [10:46ff], Matthew [20:29ff] has two blind men.)

In the previous story about the calming of the storm we saw that Jesus and disciples were crossing the lake. They now come to their destination, a place known as the Gadarenes. It got its name from the town of Gadara on the south-east side of the lake.

Here Jesus was met by two people possessed by demons who completely controlled them. Unlike many of the ordinary people, the demons in these two men have an insight into Jesus’ identity although they may not recognise it fully.”What do you want with us, Son of God?” Jesus usually refers to himself as Son of Man and never as Son of God.”Have you come here to torture us before the time?”

There was a belief that demons would be free to roam the earth until the Judgment Day came. They did this by taking possession of people. This possession was often associated with disease, because disease was the consequence of sin and a sign of being in Satan’s power. That is why when Jesus expels a demon there is often a cure as well. By driving out these spirits Jesus inaugurates the Messianic age which many of the people do not recognise but which the demons do. Later Jesus will hand over this exorcising power together with the ability to effect cures to his disciples. We will see that in the discourse in chapter 10.

The demons then begged Jesus to let them go into a nearby herd of pigs. Jesus consented to this. As soon as they had entered the pigs, the whole herd rushed headlong over a cliff and into the water below. The swineherds rushed off to the nearest town to tell what had happened.

The townspeople immediately came out in search of Jesus and, not surprisingly, begged him to go somewhere else. It might seem rather high-handed of Jesus to destroy a whole herd of pigs in this way. We have to remember, however, that in Jewish eyes these pigs were abominably unclean. There was not a better place to put demons and it was they who really brought about the destruction of the animals. But, understandably, the owners of the pigs found it difficult to see things in the same way.

The purpose of the story, of course, is to focus on Jesus’ power to liberate people from evil influences which were destroying their lives. What these men were suffering could not be compared to the loss of the pigs’ lives and these would have ended up in a cooking pot anyway.

We, too, need to ask Jesus to liberate us from any evil influences or addictions which enslave us and prevent us from being the kind of persons he wants us to be.

+++

Week 13 | Thursday

Genesis 22:1-19; Matt 9:1-8

First Reading (Genesis 22:1-19)

Today we read of an extraordinary test that Abraham was asked to go through by God. It is to be understood as a test and not a temptation. God never tempts his people to wrong but things are allowed to happen to confirm our faith or prove a commitment we have made.

We have seen how several times God promised Abraham that he would be the father of a great people. And now he is asked to offer his only legitimate son – the only link with that promised future – as a holocaust to God. It just did not make any sense at all.

But Abraham had committed himself by covenant to be obedient to the Lord and had consecrated his son Isaac to the Lord by circumcision. The Lord put his servant’s faith and loyalty to the supreme test, thereby instructing Abraham, Isaac and their descendants as to the kind of total consecration the Lord’s covenant requires. The test also foreshadowed the perfect consecration in sacrifice that another offspring of Abraham would undergo in order to wholly consecrate Abraham and his spiritual descendants (i.e. all of us) to God and to fulfil the covenant promises.

There is a parallel here with the story of Hagar and Ishmael which we read yesterday:

A journey into the wilderness

An encounter with an angel

Divine consolation and re-assurance

A miracle at the site

The naming of the site.

Abraham is told to take “his only son, Isaac, whom you love” and to offer him as a burnt offering (holocaust) on a mountain in the land of Moriah. The location of Moriah is not known for certain but it has been identified with the hill on which the Jerusalem temple was later built and later tradition accepted this identification.

We see Abraham accepting God's injunction without a word of protest. This is clearly intended to be another example of his tremendous faith and trust in God's word.

Rising early in the morning, he saddled his donkey and took Isaac together with two of his young men. And, before setting out, he also cut some wood for the sacrifice. It was on the third day of travelling that Abraham saw the place of sacrifice in the distance. He told the young men to remain behind with the donkey, while Abraham and Isaac went to the mountain to worship. After that, they would return (i.e. Abraham would return with the burnt remains of his son).

He then laid the wood for the sacrifice on the shoulders of his son, while he himself carried the fire (an unlit torch for kindling the offering) and the knife and then they proceeded to the place of sacrifice. As they walked, Isaac spoke to his father.”We have the fire and the wood but where is the lamb for the offering?” Abraham replied that God himself would provide the sacrificial lamb.

On reaching the place of sacrifice, Abraham built an altar and put the wood on it. He bound his son and laid him on the altar on top of the wood. (Isaac seems strangely submissive to all of this!) The future Lamb of God would be sacrificed on wood also.

Just as Abraham raised his knife to kill his son, an angel from heaven called him by name. Speaking in the name of God he said: “Do not lay your hand on the boy or do anything to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from me.”

Abraham then saw a ram caught in a nearby thicket by its horns. He took the ram and sacrificed it instead of his son. And Abraham called the place “The Lord will provide”, a reference to the answer Abraham gave to his son earlier on about providing a lamb for the sacrifice. It became a proverbial saying: “On the mount of the Lord it shall be provided.” This saying was particularly meaningful if the “mount” was to be identified with the hill of Zion on which the Temple was later built.

There then comes a solemn blessing from the Lord: Because Abraham was ready to sacrifice his only son, he will be especially blessed:

His offspring will be as numerous as the stars in the sky
and as the grains of sand on the seashore.
“Your offspring will possess the gate of their enemies
and by your offspring shall all the nations of the earth
gain blessings for themselves,
because you have obeyed my voice.”

The “gates of your enemies” is the first clear indication that Israel’s inheritance of Canaan will involve war with the local people and the capturing of cities. To capture the city gates was tantamount to taking the whole town or city.

Abraham then returned to where he had left the young men and they went to Beer-sheba where Abraham lived.

There are some remarkable foreshadowings in this story of Jesus’ later experience:

- As Abraham offered up his only son, so God the Father too will offer up his only Son to be sacrificed.

- Isaac carrying the wood for the holocaust on his shoulders prefigures Jesus carrying his cross to Calvary.

- And when Isaac asks where is the sheep for the holocaust, Abraham answers: “God himself will provide the sheep for the holocaust.” Jesus, too, would be the sheep of the sacrifice, he will be the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.

There is one big difference, however. In the end, God spared the life of Isaac once he knew of Abraham's fidelity; but God, who loves the world so much, did not spare his own Son, who was both Priest and Victim.

Some commentators also see in the story the basis of the ritual prescription for the redemption, the ‘buying back’ of the first-born of Israel. The first fruits of flocks and herds and animals were usually offered in sacrifice. Humans, however, were not to be sacrificed but bought back, 'redeemed'.

Commentators also see in the last minute preventing of Abraham killing his son strong opposition by the Israelites to the child-sacrifice which was common among neighbouring peoples.

But, above all, in this incident it is Abraham's faith which reaches its climax.

Once again we, too, can reflect on the extent of our faith and trust in God. Are we ready to give God anything he asks for, knowing that whatever he asks is for our good? In my life now, what would I find it most difficult to give up if God asked me?

Gospel (Matthew 9:1-8)

After the cure of the two demoniacs (yesterday’s Gospel) Jesus and his disciples now re-cross the lake and come into his own town. This refers not to Nazareth but to Capernaum, which is the centre out of which he operates in Galilee.

As usual with Matthew, he just gives the bare bones of a story which is told in a much more interesting way by Mark. Matthew concentrates on what Jesus says and does. He leaves out the details.

Some people brought a paralysed man lying on a mat to Jesus. Moved by their faith in him, Jesus says to the man, “Have courage, son, your sins are forgiven.” In Mark’s version the degree of the man’s faith is indicated by him being carried up on to the roof of the house by some friends and being let down through the roof at the feet of Jesus. Matthew says nothing about this.

The man was probably not expecting to hear Jesus mention his sins. As far as he was concerned, that was not the reason he had come to Jesus. Some scribes nearby were surprised too and even shocked.”The man is speaking blasphemously,” they thought.

Fully aware of what they were thinking, Jesus asked them: “Which is less trouble to say, ‘Your sins are forgiven’ or ‘Stand up and walk’.” Obviously, it is much easier to say, “Your sins are forgiven.” How can you know if it has taken place? But Jesus goes on: “To help you realise that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” – he then spoke to the paralysed man – “Stand up! Roll up your mat, and go home.”

And the man did just that: he rolled up his mat and walked out of the house to his home.

The people around were awestruck and praised God for giving such authority to human beings. They did not yet fully recognise the identity of Jesus but they did realise that God was acting before their very eyes. The scribes for their part were reduced to silence. Matthew’s use of the word ‘men’ seems to point to the power of Jesus being passed on to his followers – his power to heal and to forgive.

To understand this story we need to be aware of the close links that the people of the time saw between sickness and sin. Sickness, especially a chronic sickness, was often seen as a punishment for sin, either the sin of the person himself or of a parent. We remember, in John's gospel (chapter 9), how the people asked Jesus if the man was born blind because of his own sin or the sin of his parents. Similarly, after Jesus had healed a man crippled for 38 years, he told him not so sin again, for fear something worse might befall him (John 5:14).

In telling the paralysed man that his sins were forgiven Jesus was going to the root of his problem. We can probably say that sin in some form or other is at the root of all our problems. Jesus had been challenged for telling the man his sins were forgiven. To prove that he had the power to do this, he cured the man's paralysis, which, in the minds of the onlookers, was the result of his sin. If there was no more paralysis, which was caused by sin, then the sin had been taken away too.

Nowadays, we do not see something like paralysis or a physical handicap as a punishment from God. We do not believe that God works like that. On the other hand it is likely that many health problems which we have can be linked with a disharmony in our lives arising from a conflict between what we are truly meant to be and what we tend to be. We refer to some sicknesses as ‘dis-eases’. They are the result of harmful stress when we are out of harmony with ourselves, with other people and with our environment. In that sense, we can see a clear link between sin and sickness.

Perhaps if we looked at our own lives we might see that some of our physical and mental ailments are due to a lack of harmony between God and others and our surroundings. Let’s think about that today.

Week 13 | Friday

Genesis 23:1-4,19;24:1-8,62-67; Matthew 9:9-13

First Reading (Genesis 23:1-4,19;24:1-8,62-67)

We come to the end of the story of Abraham. The reading consists of selected paragraphs from chaps 23 and 24.

As the reading opens we learn that Abraham’s wife Sarah has died at Hebron, a place also known as Kiriath-arba. She was 127 years old. He is plunged into mourning with grief for his wife and the mother of his only son.

Leaving her bedside he went to the “people of Heth”, a term for pre-Israelite and non-Semitic inhabitants of Palestine. As he was an outsider and a settler in the land of Canaan, he asked for a burial plot where his wife could be laid. He still “lived in tents”, the most temporary of dwellings but he looked forward to the more permanent home promised to him, which the author of Hebrews calls “the city with foundations, whose architect and builder is God” (Heb 11:10). Ownership of burial land was a crucial step in establishing legal residence. In the culture, people had a strong desire to be buried “with their fathers” in their native land. By purchasing a burial place in Canaan, Abraham indicated his unswerving commitment to the Lord’s promise. Canaan was his new homeland.

A resident alien would normally not have the right to own property. The importance of Abraham’s purchase of the field, which is worded in technical legal terms, lies in the fact that it gave his descendants their first, though small, land rights in the country that God had promised the patriarch they would one day inherit as their own. Abraham therefore insists on purchasing the field and not receiving it as a gift. (New American Bible)

The Hittite leader was happy to give Abraham a burial place as a gift but Abraham insisted on buying it so that he had full rights over it. It gave him a legal standing in Canaan which he did not have before.

He then buried his wife in the cave “of the field of Machpelah” which he had bought and which was opposite to Mamre, in Canaan.

Abraham himself was also well advanced in years and had been blessed by God in many ways. He knows that death cannot be far away. His main concern is for his son and his future descendants.

The elaborate story of acquiring a wife for Isaac marks the last, decisive step toward fulfilment of the promise of progeny through Isaac.

First, Abraham calls his senior servant, the steward of all his vast possessions (perhaps the Eliezer we met previously), and makes him take an oath.”Place your hand under my thigh, I would have you swear by the Lord of heaven and God of earth, that you will not choose a wife for my son from the daughters of the Canaanites among whom I live.” The descendants of Abraham must come from his own people. Putting the hand under the thigh means placing them near the genital organs to signify the solemnity of the oath which follows. The symbolism of this act was apparently connected with the Hebrew concept of children issuing from their father’s ‘thigh’ (Gen 46:26; Exod 1:5). Perhaps the man who took such an oath was thought to bring the curse of sterility on himself if he did not fulfil his sworn promise. Jacob made Joseph swear in the same way (Gen 47:29). In both these instances, the oath was taken to carry out the last request of a man upon his deathbed.

The servant is to go Abraham’s land, Mesopotamia, and to choose a wife for Isaac from among his kinsfolk.

The steward has one problem. What if the future wife does not want to leave her country and go to Canaan? Is Isaac to go back and live there with her?

Abraham rules out that suggestion altogether.”The Lord, God of heaven and God of earth, took me from my father’s home, and from the land of my kinsfolk, and he swore to me that he would give this country to my descendants.” So Abraham is torn between loyalty to his own people, the ‘purity’ of his family line and his mandate to take possession of his adopted home.

Abraham promises his steward that God will send an angel ahead of him to choose a suitable wife for his son. However, if the woman chosen is not willing to come back to Canaan, the steward will be released from the oath he is now being asked to make. The steward then put his hand under Abraham’s thigh and made the oath.

We now move to the end of chapter 24 for the last part of the reading. In between, there is the long account of how the steward went to Mesopotamia and came across the beautiful Rebekah coming to a well to draw water. (Jacob – later called ‘Israel’ - will meet his future wife, Rachel, at a well also. Is there an echo of these scenes in John’s gospel where Jesus meets the Samaritan woman at a well, symbolic of the Old Testament, and takes her as his ‘spiritual’ bride into the New Covenant? Cf. John 4). She turns out to be a niece of Abraham, the daughter of his brother Nahor, and is a virgin. She fulfils all the requirements. The steward meets her family, showers them with gifts from his master and then takes Rebekah back to Canaan (cf. Gen 24:10-61).

We are then told that Isaac, who lived in the Negeb, had come into the wilderness of the well of Lahai Roi (another well!). This was the site of the annunciation of Ishmael’s birth to Hagar. Isaac’s emergence from there has a symbolic resonance – henceforth he will have his own posterity.

As he walked in the evening light, Isaac saw a caravan of camels approaching. With it was Rebekah (Rebecca). She looked up and saw Isaac, her future husband, for the first time. Getting down from her camel she asked who was the man she saw walking towards them.

“That is my master,” Abraham’s servant replied, and Rebekah immediately veiled her face, perhaps indicating that she was unmarried. Up to now the steward’s master had been Abraham; from now on it is Isaac, the new patriarch of the family.

The servant then told Isaac all that had happened in his search for a bride. Isaac, without more ado, led Rebekah into his tent and made her his wife.”And he loved her.” In other words, they had intercourse as man and wife. And, the reading says in conclusion, “Isaac was consoled for the loss of his mother.”

Isaac is now head of the family but we will not spend too much time with him. In fact, there will be just one more reading on him.

Gospel (Matthew 9:9-13)

The cure of the paralytic is immediately followed by the call of Matthew, named Levi by Mark and Luke in their versions of the story.

Matthew/Levi was an unlikely disciple; he was a tax collector. Tax collectors were among the most despised group of people in Jewish society of the time. Tax collectors never can be particularly popular, given their distasteful job, but in Jesus’ time they were collecting taxes for the hated and pagan colonial ruler. As such they were seen as collaborators and traitors to their own people and to their religion. The Romans had the custom of farming out the collecting of taxes to volunteer agents. These paid up the amount that the Romans demanded and then had to get the money back from the people. In doing so they often collected more than they had paid the Romans. This was their ‘commission’ but there was often an element of extortion and corruption in the whole practice.

Now Jesus invites one of these despised people to be his follower. It is an example of Jesus looking beyond the exterior and the stereotype to the potential of the real person inside. Immediately after this Jesus is seen sitting “in his house” having dinner with his disciples when they are joined by a number of tax collectors and other public sinners. It is not clear whether the ‘his’ refers to the house where Jesus was staying or Matthew’s house. In either event, it was bound to attract the notice of Jesus’ critics.

And indeed some Pharisees, seeing this, are shocked. They ask the disciples (not Jesus): “Why does your master eat with tax collectors and sinners?” If Jesus is a man of God and a teacher, how can he be seen in the company of people who are religiously unclean? To be in their company is to become contaminated and unclean also.

Overhearing them, Jesus replies: “It is not the healthy who need the doctor, but the sick.” And he continues, “Go and learn the meaning of the words, ‘What I want is mercy, not sacrifice’. And indeed I did not come to call the virtuous but sinners.” Jesus turns the tables on the Pharisees by looking at the situation from a completely different perspective.

The problem is not of Jesus becoming contaminated by the sinful and the unclean but rather their becoming healed by his presence and influence. The legally minded (the ritualists) are only interested in themselves; those governed by love (the merciful) think primarily of the needs of their brothers and sisters. There is no need for Jesus to spend time with the virtuous, with the already converted; it is those in spiritual and moral deprivation with whom he needs to spend his time.

The lesson of today's reading is extremely relevant for our own day. When looking for potential followers of Christ where do we tend to look? How many times have we heard people wonder why God picked them as Christian leaders – as priests, religious or lay people? When we look at the 12 apostles, they were indeed a strange bunch. Full of faults, fragile in their faith but in the end they started something extraordinary.

And is it not true that a great deal of our pastoral energies in our churches are directed at the already converted? Is it not true that those most in need of experiencing Christ's love and healing are never touched by us? How many places in our inner cities do we as Christians avoid because they are “not suitable” for “good Catholics”? Where is the presence of Christ visible in our bars, discos, and other places of entertainment?

Week 13 | Saturday

Genesis 27:1-5,15-29; Matt 9:14-17

First Reading (Genesis 27:1-5,15-29)

We jump a couple of chapters in our story today. There is relatively little about Isaac in the Genesis story; he is seen mainly in relationship to his father Abraham and his two sons, Esau and Jacob.

Today's passage begins with Isaac already in his old age and blind. As we will see, he is blind in more ways than one. Before he dies he wants to give his final, solemn blessing to his heir. And whoever gets that blessing will be the heir.

He calls his elder son, Esau, into his presence. Isaac tells his son that he is now old and does not know when he is going to die. He gives instructions to Esau to get his hunting gear together and bring back some game. Then he is to take it and prepare the kind of savoury dish which Esau knows his father likes. Then Isaac will give Esau, his son and heir, a blessing before he dies. The language suggests a special blessing which was legally binding and, as a solemn deathbed blessing, especially efficacious.

Rebekah, the mother, happens to overhear this conversation. She is not happy because she wants the blessing to go to Jacob, her favourite son. She makes a plan to deceive her husband and reveals it to Jacob. It is not included in our reading but Jacob had a serious problem with his mother’s plan. He was a smooth-skinned man but Esau was very hairy. If Isaac touched Jacob he would immediately know that it was not Esau he was blessing. Rebekah says she will take care of that problem.

After Esau had gone out into the countryside to hunt some game, Rebekah dressed Jacob in Esau’s best clothes, which were in the house. She also covered Jacob’s arms and the smooth back of his neck with the fur of the kids which had been killed to make the savoury dish.

She then gave the savoury dish which she had prepared and some bread for Jacob to bring in to his father. In the presence of his father, Jacob announces, “I am here.” “Who are you, my son?” asks Isaac. Isaac replies that he is Esau, his father’s first-born. Dressed in Esau’s best clothes, Jacob tells his father to get up and enjoy the dish he has prepared and then to give his son his final blessing.

When Isaac expresses surprise that the hunting has taken such a short time, Jacob smoothly replies that it was God who put the animals in his path. To bring God into the lie might seem blasphemous to us but the mentality of the time would see no wrong in it, as every event was ascribed to God, ignoring ‘secondary (i.e. human) causes’.

Perhaps still a little sceptical, Isaac asks his son to come near so that he can feel him and make sure whether it is Esau or not. After touching him, Isaac comments that the voice is the voice of Jacob but the arms are the arms of Esau. And then Isaac gives his blessing to Jacob, a blessing that was intended for Esau. Even then, the father still seems to have his doubts. He asks once more: “Are you really my son Esau?”, to which Jacob brazenly answers, “I am”.

Isaac then asks for the dish to be brought and give his blessing. The favourite dish is brought as well as some wine. (It had been prepared by Rebekah who would know exactly the tastes of her husband.)

The father then asks his son to come closer and to give him a kiss. As Jacob does so, the father recognises the smell of the clothes, the clothes of Esau. The deception is complete. We might note that in his attempt to obtain the covenant blessing, Jacob, the father of Israel, betrays with a kiss. Later, it will be Jesus, the great Son of Israel, who will ultimately obtain the blessing for the new Israel, who will be betrayed with a kiss (Matt 26:48-49; Luke 22:48).

There then follows the beautiful blessing of Isaac given to Jacob but intended for Esau. In saying “Be lord over your brothers” Isaac unwittingly blesses Jacob and his descendants, thus fulfilling God’s promise made earlier to Rebekah. In chap 25, Rebekah becomes pregnant with twins who jostle with each other within her womb. When she asks the Lord what is happening, he tells her:

Two nations are in your womb,
and two people from within you will be separated;
one people will be stronger than the other,
and the older will serve the younger” (Gen 25:21-23).

This is not an altogether edifying story. One evaluation goes like this:

What Jacob did in deceiving his father and thereby cheating Esau out of Isaac’s deathbed blessing is condemned as blameworthy, not only by Hosea (12:4) and Jeremiah (9:3*) but also, indirectly, by the Yahwist narrator of the present story, who makes the reader sympathise with Esau as the innocent victim of a cruel plot, and shows that Jacob and his mother, the instigator of the plot, paid for it by a lifelong separation from each other. The story was told because it was part of the mystery of God’s ways in salvation history – his use of weak, sinful people to achieve his own ultimate purpose. (New American Bible)

* ‘Put no trust in any brother / Every brother apes Jacob, the supplanter.’

As the Jerusalem Bible comments: “The morality is immature but the lie reported here mysteriously serves God's purpose; the free divine choice preferred Jacob to Esau.”

We need to remember, too, in an earlier scene not read during the liturgy at this time, that Esau, simply because he was very hungry, had exchanged his birthright with his brother Jacob in exchange for a bowl of red soup. The author of Genesis makes the laconic comment: “That was all Esau cared for his birthright.” He is seen therefore as having forfeited his birthright in a very trivial and irresponsible way (cf. Gen 25:29-34). Jacob, then, was technically entitled to what his brother had yielded to him and he did that in the way we have seen.

Even so, we probably still cannot give our full approval for his behaving in this way but it is an example where a less than good action produces, in the long-term, desirable results. We can all probably think of similar examples from our own lives. We may have felt unjustly deprived of something which we thought was due to us but as a result something far better came into our lives. As people like to say, “God can write straight with crooked lines.”

Jacob and his mother definitely deceived Isaac and were dishonest with him but subsequent events clearly proved that Jacob was going to be a much better patriarch than Esau. We have no right to act unjustly or falsely, yet we do need to realise that good things can come from the immoral or mistaken actions or decisions of others.

Gospel (Matthew 9:14-17)

Today's reading follows on yesterday's challenge of Jesus by some Pharisees. On that occasion they asked why Jesus was eating with sinners and outcasts. Now they go one step further and ask why he is eating at all. They put forward the example of John the Baptist and his disciples who used to fast regularly. Jews were only required to fast one day in the year, on the feast of Atonement. However, like the Pharisees, it seems that John’s disciples used to observe fasts which were not prescribed by the Law in the hope that their extra devotion would bring about an early coming of the Kingdom.

Jesus answers their question in two ways:

First, people do not fast when they are in the company of the bridegroom. That is a time for celebration. By implication, of course, Jesus is the groom. As long as he is around, it would be inappropriate for his disciples to fast. However, he says a time will come when the groom is no longer with them and then there will be reasons to fast.

His second answer is more profound and takes the form of two examples. It does not make sense to repair an old piece of clothing with a patch of new cloth. The new cloth, being much tougher, will under stress only cause the older cloth to tear. In the second example, he says that it is not wise to put new wine into old wineskins. Wine was kept in containers made of leather. Because new wine was still fermenting and expanding it needed to be put in new leather bags which were resilient and could expand with the wine. The old bags would be already stretched and new wine would only cause them to burst. Then both the wine would be lost and the bags ruined.

What did Jesus mean by these images? He was giving a clear message to his critics. Jesus’ ideas were like new wine or new cloth. They could not be fitted into old containers. People like the Pharisees were trying to fit Jesus’ teaching and his ideas into their ways of thinking. It would not work.

Clearly, the old garment and the old wineskins represented Judaism in so far as it contained elements which were being replaced. The new cloth and the new wine are the spirit of Kingdom as proclaimed by Jesus. The ex gratia devotions of the Pharisees and John’s disciples were like patches on old cloth or new wine in old wineskins, trying to put life into something that was giving way to a totally new order. The new wine that Jesus brought involved what we would call now a paradigm shift, a radically new understanding of how God was to be loved and served.

So John’s disciples wanted to know, for example, why Jesus was not fasting. Because, in their book, a Jew fasted and a pious Jew fasted more often. But Jesus did not measure religion by external actions like fasting or keeping other requirements of the law (such as washing hands before eating, etc). For him religion was a matter of the inner spirit as we saw in his deeper interpretations of the Law during the Sermon on the Mount.

Over the centuries the Church has moved its position in many areas as it reaches a deeper understanding of the faith and how it is to be lived in a changing world. Such a movement took place with the Second Vatican Council. It involved much more than external changes (like having the Mass in the vernacular instead of Latin). It involved a whole new way of seeing our faith and our place as Christians in the world.

There are still, however, people who try to live in the post-Vatican II Church with a pre-Vatican II mentality. It is like trying to squeeze new wine in old wineskins. It is a source of much friction and misunderstandings in many Christian communities. We all have an obligation both to enter fully into the mind of Christ as presented in the New Testament and into the mind of the Church in this post-Vatican II era.

Week 14 | Monday

Genesis 28:10-22; Matthew 9:18-26

First Reading (Genesis 28:10-22)

Today and tomorrow we read of two strange experiences which Jacob has.

On the way from Beersheba to Haran, Jacob stops for the night. (Haran, we may remember, was the place between Ur and Canaan where Abraham lived before moving down to Canaan. It was there, too, that he had found Rachel, the wife of his son Isaac.)

Using a stone for a pillow, he lies down to sleep just where he is. As he sleeps, he has a dream. He sees a staircase reaching from the earth right up to heaven. And on it there were angels or messengers of God going up and down.

We normally speak of “Jacob’s Ladder” but, in fact, the Hebrew word sullam means a stairway. The image in Jacob’s dream is derived from the Babylonian ziggurat or temple tower. On the outside was a flight of brick steps leading to a small temple at the top. As we saw in our earlier readings from Genesis, the Tower of Babel was modelled on such a tower.

The angels or messengers of God going up and down the staircase between earth and heaven are a sign that the Lord is offering to be Jacob’s God. Later, Jesus would tell Nathanael that he would “see heaven open and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man (John 1:51). Jesus himself becomes the stairway between heaven and earth (cf. John 14:6), the “only Mediator between God and humankind” (1 Tim 2:5). He is also called the Pontifex or Bridge-maker.

Jacob then sees God standing above him and speaking to him. This continues the image of the ziggurat where the god is present at the top of the tower. And God identifies himself to the sleeping Jacob: “I am the Lord, the God of Abraham your father, and the God of Isaac.”

Then come the promises:

The land on which Jacob is lying will be given to him and his descendants.

Once again God promises –

that his descendants will be as numerous as specks of dust on the earth;

that they will spread in every direction; and

that all the tribes of the earth will bless themselves by Jacob and his descendants..

God promises to be with Jacob and his descendants always and bring them back to this land. God will not desert them until all his promises have been fulfilled. In this God is unlike the gods of pagan religions, who were merely local deities giving protection only in their own territories. Here God assures Jacob that he will be with him wherever he goes. This promise, of course, has relevance to the later periods of exile.

Jacob then wakes up and realises: "Truly, Yahweh is in this place and I never knew it!" If he had known, he might not have chose just that place to have a sleep. He is filled with fear: “How awe-inspiring this place is! This is nothing less than a house of God; that is the gate of heaven!”

“This” refers to the stone used as a pillow while “that” is the staircase of his dream.

To commemorate his experience, Jacob takes the stone he had used for a pillow and sets it up as a memorial stone, consecrating it with oil. A ‘memorial stone’ (in Hebrew, messaba) might vary in shape or size, be set upright and usually intended for some religious purpose. The custom of erecting such ‘sacred pillars’ went back to the pre-Israelite period and their pagan associations were often retained. For that reason, later Israelite religion forbade their being erected (e.g. Lev 26:1) and ordered the destruction of those with pagan associations (Exod 34:31).

The stone used as a pillow now marks the place of God’s presence. The place, formerly known as Luz, is now named beth El, “a house of God”. Jacob anoints the stone with oil as a formal act of worship and consecration. Practices of this kind were common in the Canaanite world and in the Semitic world in general but, as already mention, were later condemned by both the Law and the prophets (cf. Exod 23:24)

Before leaving the place, Jacob makes a final vow. If God keeps his promises and protects Jacob, then Yahweh will be his God, the stone he has set up as a memorial will become the house of God.

(It is not fully clear about the concept of God at this point, especially with terms like “the God of Abraham, of Isaac, of Jacob”. The later concept of a unique universal God seems yet to be conceived. Each of the people of those days had their own protecting god who had to be served. The Israelites had their God too, a powerful God, a God who was always with them wherever they went but not seen as the God of other peoples.)

Several of the Church Fathers later saw in Jacob's ladder an image of the providential care God exercises on earth through the ministry of the angels. Others saw in it a foreshadowing of the incarnation of the Word who linked heaven with earth (Jesus as the Mediator mentioned above). The liturgy makes use of v.17 (“How awesome is this place…”) in the Office and Mass for the dedication of a church.

The story is a continuation and a confirmation of the covenant promise God had made earlier with Abraham. The same promises are now made to the grandson, who, as we shall see, will be the father of the Twelve Patriarchs, from whom all God’s people are descended.

And that promise reaches down to Jesus himself and through him to us, who are the ‘spiritual’ offspring of Jacob. In a sense that Jacob or the Israelites could never have imagined, God's people – with Jesus as Lord – have become a blessing for countless millions of people all over the world.

Gospel (Matthew 9:18-26)

There is a great contrast in the way Matthew tells this double story compared to Mark.

Matthew strips it down to the bare details. The 20 verses that Mark needs are reduced here to 9. He makes no mention of the large crowd that was following Jesus; only his disciples are present. He concentrates on Jesus and on what Jesus does and says.

A synagogue official approaches Jesus and says that his daughter has just died. He is in fact the head of the synagogue and in Mark and Luke we learn that his name is Jairus. In Mark's version, the girl is seriously ill and only dies later in the story.”Please come and lay your hand on her and she will come back to life.” It is an extraordinary act of faith in the power of Jesus. Up to this he had not brought anyone back from the dead.

As Jesus and his disciples were on the way to the house, a woman who had suffered from a bleeding problem for 12 years unobtrusively touched the hem of Jesus’ garment.”If only I can touch his cloak, I shall get well.” Again, we are presented with a deep faith and trust in Jesus’ power.

This was really the only way this unfortunate woman could approach Jesus with other people around. Her bleeding was not only a physical ailment. It also involved ritual uncleanness and she was not supposed to be in close contact with people. If they had known, they might have done something terrible to her. Nor, for the same reason, could she approach Jesus openly about her problem, so she quietly touched the hem of his robe. She trusted that that would be enough and she was right.

Jesus, realising she had touched his garment, turned and said kindly, “Courage, daughter! Your faith has made you whole again.” And the bleeding stops instantly.

We now go back to the original story. As Jesus and his disciples approach the house they find a large crowd of mourners, many of them wailing and weeping in the fashion still common in West, South and East Asia. Jesus tells them all to go away.”The little girl is not dead; she is asleep.” At which, the crowd laughed at him. Whether the girl was actually dead or was simply in some kind of death-like coma does not really matter. As far as everyone around was concerned she was dead.

Jesus went into the house, took the girl by the hand and she “arose”. There are overtones of resurrection in the word “arose”.

In both these stories, using the literary device of ‘inclusion’ with one story wrapped inside another, we have a common theme of Jesus as Lord of life. It is Matthew’s way of saying what we read in John: “I am the resurrection and the life.” That life is to be understood in the fullest possible sense involving the physical, social, intellectual and spiritual.

In one story the girl is not only given back her physical life but is restored to the bosom of her family and all that means. In the other story, not only is the woman's haemorrhage stopped but she can be fully reinstated into normal relationships with the people around her. She is in a very real sense made whole again.

Let us today pray for Jesus to heal us and make us whole, the wholeness that is holiness, the holiness that is wholeness.

Week 14 | Tuesday

Genesis 32:23-33; Matthew 9:32-38

First Reading (Genesis 32:23-33)

We jump a few chapters in our story of Jacob and come to an experience even more strange than the vision of the ladder/staircase going up to heaven.

Jacob has been preparing to meet with his estranged brother Esau. He was not at all sure what kind of meeting it was going to be with the brother whom he had cheated out of his birth-right. Each one was now rich and powerful in his own domain.

As our reading opens we are told that Jacob takes his two wives (Rachel and Leah), his two slave-girls and his 11 children (the youngest, Benjamin, has been conceived but not born), together with all his possessions, across the River Jabbok to a safer place while he stays behind alone.

‘Jabbok’ is possibly a play on ‘Jacob’. (The author loves toying with names in this way. See below.) The river is an eastern tributary of the Jordan originating near present-day Amman. It is known today as the Wadi Zerqa and flows westwards into the Jordan about 30 km north of the Dead Sea.

Jacob is now alone and then, during the whole night until dawn, he wrestles with an unknown man. As is clear later on, this ‘man’ is a messenger of the Lord, if not the Lord himself, in human form. Is this to be seen as a ‘real’ experience or was it just another dream or some purely internal experience? “Wrestled” in Hebrew (ye’abeq) is a play on ‘Jacob’ (ya‘aqob) and ‘Jabbok’ (yabboq).

Jacob has struggled all his life to prevail, first with Esau, then with Laban, his uncle who is the father of his wife, Rachel. Now, as he is about to re-enter Canaan, he is shown that it is with God that he must “wrestle”. It is God who holds his destiny in his hands.

When the ‘man’ sees that Jacob is getting the upper hand, he strikes Jacob on the hip and dislocates it. The hip socket is the fleshy part of the thigh. There is a hint of injury to the sexual organs and, indeed, with Benjamin, his 12th and youngest son, already conceived, Jacob will have no more children. God came to him in such a form that Jacob could wrestle with him successfully, yet he also showed Jacob that he could disable him at will.

With the coming of morning the stranger says, “Let me go, for day is breaking.” But Jacob will not let the man go without receiving his blessing. He seems to suspect the divine origin of his opponent. There is also an indication that Jacob is still having problems over their father’s blessing which he got by deceit. He wants now a direct blessing from God himself.

“What is your name?” asks the stranger.”Jacob” is the reply.”Your name shall no longer be Jacob, but Israel, because you have been strong against God, you shall prevail against humans.” The probable meaning of the word ‘Israel’ is “May God show his strength” but here it is understood as “He has been strong against God”. At that very moment Jacob reaches full maturity as father and patriarch, his descendants acquire their national name. Later, Israel’s encounters with God will constantly entail intense struggle, with divine and human alike. God will later confirm Jacob’s new name (Gen 35:10). The present incident, where the name Israel is alluded to, is referred to in a passage from Hosea (12:5) where the mysterious wrestler is explicitly called an angel.

Jacob then asks the stranger his name but the only answer he gets is, “Why do you ask my name?” Given that the stranger is God himself, it is wrong to ask such a question and, in any case, it cannot be answered. The name of Yahweh could not be uttered by any observant Israelite. But the man does give Jacob his blessing.

Jacob, however, is now well aware of who the stranger is: “I have seen God face to face and have survived.” In the Hebrew Testament, to look upon the face of God spells instant death, except by special privilege. So in Exodus we read, “The Lord used to speak to Moses face to face, as one man speaks to another” (Exod 33:11). After these encounters his face shone so brightly that he had to keep it veiled when speaking to his countrymen. But God also said to Moses: “My face you cannot see, for no one sees me and still lives” (Exod 33:20). Only God’s ‘back’ or ‘feet’ or ‘form’, in a symbolic sense, were allowed to be seen.

So Jacob calls the place, where he had his experience with the stranger, Peniel, which means ‘face of God’. The word is a variant of ‘Penuel’, the name of a town on the north bank of the River Jabbok in Gilead.

Then he leaves, limping because of his damaged hip. Limping is a frequent motif in myth and legend (Oedipus, too, limps), suggesting a maturing in his relationship with God, who is the real Lord of his life. It parallels in some ways the experience of Abraham at Moriah where he was told to sacrifice his only son. Although less whole physically, he is precisely through his experience more spiritually complete. He is now Israel and not just Jacob.

And, the reading tells us, to this day Jews will not eat the sciatic nerve which is in the socket of the hip, because that is where God had struck Jacob. Although mentioned nowhere else in the Hebrew Testament, this dietary prohibition is found in the later writings of Judaism. Jacob retained in his body, and Israel retained in her dietary practice, a perpetual reminder of this fateful encounter with God.

Finally, let us hear the Jerusalem Bible commentary on this scene:

This enigmatic story, probably Yahwistic, speaks of a physical struggle, a wrestling with God from which Jacob seems to emerge victor. Jacob recognises the supernatural character of his adversary and extorts a blessing from him. The text, however, avoids using the name of Yahweh and the unknown antagonist will not give his name. The author has made use of an old story as a means of explaining the name ‘Peniel’ (‘face of God’) and the origin of the name ‘Israel’.

At the same time he gives the story a religious significance: Jacob holds fast to God and forces from him a blessing; henceforth all who bear Israel’s name will have a claim on God.

It is not surprising that this dramatic scene later served as an image of the spiritual combat and of the value of persevering prayer (e.g. St Jerome, Origen). It was advice that Jesus himself gave and also St Paul.

Gospel (Matthew 9:32-38)

We come today to the end of the section (chaps 8-9) recounting ten miracles of Jesus. The last single miracle described is that of a man whose deafness is arises from his being possessed by a demon. It follows immediately the cure of two blind men, a story which we did not read and which is told again by Matthew in chap. 20. It seems to correspond to the healing of the blind man Bartimaeus in Mark (chap. 10), although there are significant differences.

The man is brought to Jesus by the people. Jesus drives out the demon and the man immediately is able to speak. There is a double reaction. The people are astounded: “Nothing like this has ever been seen in Israel!” The implications of Jesus’ divine origins are very clear. On the other hand, Pharisees were saying, “It is through the prince of devils that he casts out devils.” Elsewhere Jesus will show the absurd illogicality of that charge.

Stories of blindness, deafness and dumbness in the Gospel always have a deeper meaning. Far more serious than physical blindness, deafness and dumbness are being spiritually blind, deaf and dumb. The Pharisees in the Gospel represent such people and we see it happening in this story. They are blind because they cannot see or do not want to see God at work in Jesus; they are deaf because they do not hear or do not want to understand what he says. And they are also dumb because they cannot speak the words of life that Jesus gives them.

The very same can happen to each one of us. Let us pray today to be able to see clearly, to understand what God says to us and to be able to share it with others.

This section of Matthew concludes with a general description or summary of what Jesus was doing. He was going through all the towns and villages of Galilee; he was teaching in synagogues; he was proclaiming the Good News of the Kingdom; and he was healing all kinds of diseases and sickness.

But, behind all that he does, is his deep compassion for the needs of the people. He sees them harassed and dejected, wandering and aimless like sheep without a guiding shepherd – a familiar image in the Old Testament (cf. Ezekiel 34). Then, looking at his disciples, he says, “The harvest is rich but the labourers are few, so ask the Lord of the harvest to send labourers to his harvest.” Jesus cannot do it all on his own. In fact, he will hardly step outside the boundaries of Palestine. He needs many helpers.

Today, the situation has not changed. The harvest is as big as ever; people are as lost and rudderless as they have ever been in spite of the great strides in knowledge we have made. Where are the labourers? They are not just the bishops, priests, religious brothers and sisters. That is a very narrow concept of labourers. Every single baptised person is called, in some way, to be a harvester, to help people find and experience the truth and love that God gives in Jesus. Every single person, in that sense and it is a very real sense, has a vocation, a call to serve and to build the Kingdom.

What and where and with whom is my vocation?

Week 14 | Wednesday

Genesis 41:55-57;42:5-7,17-24; Matt 10:1-7

First Reading (Genesis 41:55-57;42:5-7,17-24)

Today's reading finds us in Egypt with Joseph, the second youngest son of Jacob’s twelve sons.

We have skipped the whole saga of how Joseph came to be sold into slavery by his brothers and the gradual process by which he rose from being a Hebrew slave to becoming the Pharaoh’s right hand man. This was largely due to his ability to interpret dreams and to his personal integrity. It was Joseph who had predicted the famine that is now on the land and Joseph who had made preparations to deal with it when it came.

As the effects of the famine began to be felt in Egypt, the people cried out to the Pharaoh for food.

The Pharaoh referred them to his grand vizier, his most senior official: “Go to Joseph and do what he tells you.” Such was his confidence in the ability of his chief official (who was, of course, an Israelite – a point that would not be lost on those hearing this story read to them.)

Joseph threw open the granaries where, because of his foresight, the surplus of previous harvests had been stored and sold the grain to the Egyptians. But the famine was not confined to Egypt and people came “from all over the world” to buy grain from Joseph.

The land of Canaan was also affected so Jacob’s sons also made the same journey with others to get food. And it was Joseph, as the effective ruler of the country, to whom they all had to go. Jacob had kept his youngest son, Benjamin, behind with him in case his other sons might not be able to return.

As the sons of Jacob come into the presence of the chief minister, they bow down before him, their faces touching the ground. This is exactly what Joseph had foretold they would be doing when, many years before, he told them the dream he had of their sheaves of wheat bowing down before his (Gen 37:5-9). And it was this dream which had so angered them that they sold him into slavery. Now they come to the same brother – still unrecognised by them – to be saved from death. How ironic! How God works in strange ways to help us!

Joseph, of course, recognised his brothers but said nothing at this stage. Instead he treated them as if they were strangers and threw them into prison for three days with the prospect of even worse things to come. They were getting a taste of the treatment he had experienced as a result of their rejection.

On the third day, Joseph told them they could save their lives if they did what he wanted. They could rely on him because “I am a man who fears God”. He spoke to them very severely and earlier had accused them of being spies. They can take grain back home with them for their families but they have to leave one of their brothers behind as a pledge. Then, after they get home, they are to bring back their youngest brother, Benjamin, whom Joseph had never seen – otherwise they will be condemned to die.

The brothers immediately began to discuss among themselves their situation. They knew that Jacob, now an old man, would be very reluctant to let Benjamin fall into the hands of the Egyptians.

But they had little choice and the brothers agreed to Joseph’s conditions.

At the same time, they realised that all this was a just punishment for the way they had treated their brother Joseph.”We saw his misery of soul when he begged our mercy but we did not listen to him and now this misery has come home to us.” Reuben, the only one who was against Joseph being killed, now blamed his brothers for their present situation.”You did not listen, and now we are brought to account for his blood.” They presumed Joseph was long dead.

They said all this in Joseph’s presence, not realising that he understood every single word. When he addressed them he had spoken through an interpreter. He now hurriedly leaves their presence and breaks down in tears. Such tenderness on the part of a high-ranking official is rare in the Hebrew Testament.

When he returned to their presence he had one of the brothers, Simeon, bound before their eyes as a hostage for the production of Benjamin on their next visit. He also gave orders that the brothers’ bags were to be filled with grain and that the money taken from them should be given back to each man. He also gave them provisions for their journey home. (This last paragraph is not in our reading today.)

Tomorrow we will see the happy outcome of this drama.

For obvious reasons much of this lovely account of Joseph (beginning in Chapter 37) has to be left out but it is well worth reading the whole story, one of the most touching in the whole of the Old Testament, a beautiful story in its own right.

Joseph stands out as a man of great compassion, a man of strong and sensitive feelings, and a person of the utmost integrity. He would have been a rarity in his day and even in our own.

As we read this story we could perhaps reflect with some profit on our own sense of justice, compassion and the level of our integrity in our dealings with friends, colleagues and strangers.

Gospel (Matthew 10:1-7)

We begin today the second of the five discourses of Jesus which are a unique feature of Matthew's gospel. It consists of instructions to Jesus’ disciples on how they are to conduct their missionary work and the reactions they can expect in carrying it out.

It begins by the summoning of the inner circle of twelve disciples. Matthew presumes we already know about their formal selection, which he does not recount. (Mark and Luke clearly distinguish the selection from the later missioning.) These twelve disciples are now called apostles.

The two words are distinct in meaning and we should not confuse them. A disciple (Latin discipulus, from discere, to learn) is a follower, someone who learns from a teacher and assimilates that teaching into his own life. An apostle (Greek, apostolos, from apostello) is someone who is sent out on a mission, someone who is deputed to disseminate the teaching of the master to others. In the New Testament a distinction is made between the two. All the gospels, for instance, speak of the Twelve Apostles and Luke mentions 72 Disciples.

However, that does not mean the two roles are mutually exclusive. On the contrary, all of us who are called to be disciples are also expected to be apostles, actively sharing our faith with others. It is very easy for us to see ourselves, ‘ordinary’ Catholics, as disciples and to regard priests and religious as doing the apostolic work of the Church. That would be very wrong. Every one of us called to be a disciple is eo ipso, in virtue of Baptism and Confirmation, also called to be an apostle.

Applied to the twelve men (yes, they were all men – and thereby hang many disputes!) the word ‘apostle’ does have a special sense. They would become, so to speak, the pillars or foundations on which the new Church would be built, with Peter as their leader. They would have the special role of handing on and interpreting the tradition they had received from Jesus, a role which in turn they handed on to what we now call the bishops, with the pope, as leader and spokesperson.

Later on, Paul would be added to their number and Matthias would be chosen to replace the renegade Judas. In fact, it is interesting to see the mixed bunch of people that Jesus chose. We know next to nothing about most of them but they were for the most part simple people, some of them definitely uneducated and perhaps even illiterate. Judas may well have been the most qualified among them. And yet we see the extraordinary results they produced and the unstoppable movement they set in motion. The only explanation is that it was ultimately the work of God through the Holy Spirit.

The first instructions they are given are to confine their activities to their own people. They are not to go to pagans at this stage or even to the Samaritans. As the heirs to the covenant and as God's people, the Jews are to be the first to be invited to follow the Messiah and experience his saving power. And their proclamation is the same one that Jesus gave at the outset of his public preaching: “The Kingdom of Heaven [i.e. of God] is at hand.”

Week 14 | Thursday

Genesis 44:18-21,23-29;45:1-5; Matt 10:7-15

First Reading (Genesis 44:18-21,23-29;45:1-5)

We continue the story of Joseph and his brothers. In our reading, large sections have been omitted from the biblical narrative and what immediately follows here is by way of a lead-in to the actual reading.

Still not knowing the real identity of the Pharaoh’s chief minister, the brothers return to their father Jacob with the food Joseph had given them but without their brother Simeon, who is being held as a hostage until they bring Benjamin with him on their next visit. Joseph has expressly asked to see their youngest brother, although at this stage they do not know the real reason.

With great reluctance – he has already lost Joseph and Simeon – Jacob agrees to let his youngest and dearest son Benjamin go back with them to Egypt. They have to go because the famine continues and their food has run out.

They are received by Joseph with great pomp and ceremony. When he sees his younger brother, his only full brother by the same mother, Joseph is overcome with emotion and has to leave the hall until he recovers. After this meeting, the brothers are sent home again, laden with food. But, unknown to them, Joseph has arranged to have a silver cup hidden in Benjamin's sack.

While already on their way, servants of Joseph are sent and accuse the brothers of theft. They are horrified when they find the cup in Benjamin’s sack; he will have to stay behind and presumably be severely punished. Knowing their father’s love for Benjamin, the brothers are distraught at this turn of events.

It is at this point that our reading today begins.

Judah, the eldest of the brothers, pleads on behalf of his youngest brother but even more on behalf of his father who will be heartbroken if Benjamin does not return, something the brothers had sworn to Jacob would happen.

This whole passage (we read only a part) is one of the longest speeches in biblical story-telling and marks the turning point in the brothers’ present dealings with Joseph. Judah is the hero of this scene, remarkably retelling the whole story as it has unfolded so far.

He speaks to Joseph with great deference and fear. He uses the language of a subject speaking to a high official. He even uses the expected flattery – “You are equal to Pharaoh himself.” He tells Joseph that, when they left home the first time, there was just their father, who is already very old, and their youngest brother. The father is particularly attached to Benjamin because the only other boy he had by Rachel was Joseph, who, of course, all believe is dead.

Even so, Jacob had to let his brothers bring Benjamin to be seen by Joseph or they would not get any more food which they so badly needed as the famine continued. Now, Benjamin has been arrested because of the cup, presumed stolen by him, found in his sack of food.

Judah tells Joseph about the words of Jacob before they left for Egypt with Benjamin:

“You know that my wife bore me two children. When one left me, I said he must have been torn to pieces. And I have not seen him to this day.” Jacob believed that this was the fate of Joseph because, when the brothers returned home one day without Joseph, they produced his famous coat of many colours saturated with blood. Jacob believed it was Joseph’s blood, the result of being killed by an animal. The coat had actually been dipped in animal blood precisely so that Jacob would reach this conclusion. The reader, of course, knows that Joseph had actually been sold into slavery by his brothers to a group of traders on their way to Egypt. (And the rest, as they say...)

Judah, who is telling Joseph this, knows very well what happened and he and all his brothers are now covered in feelings of guilt. Jacob’s final words to his sons had been: “If you take this one (Benjamin) from me too and any harm comes to him, you will send me down to Sheol with my white head bowed in misery.”

In verses not included in today's reading, Judah then offers himself as a slave to Joseph, if only Benjamin can be allowed to return home to his father.

Joseph now can no longer control his feelings. He orders all his retainers out of the audience hall and then, for the first time, reveals his true identity to his brothers.”I am Joseph.” And, for the third time in this story, he breaks down into great sobbing, “so loud that the Egyptians heard him, and so the news reached Pharaoh's palace”.

Joseph then asks about his father but the brothers are left speechless, partly out of sheer astonishment (is it a ghost?) and partly out of fear of vengeance on the part of their wronged brother. But he has already teased them enough and he reassures them they have nothing to fear.

He then tells them to come closer to him. Up to now, they would have had to keep a very respectful distance before such a senior official in the Pharaoh’s court. He now wants to speak with him as family.

And, far from being angry with them, he shows them that everything that happened was in the providence of God.”But now, do not grieve, do not reproach yourselves for having sold me here, since God sent me here to preserve your lives.” Another example of God writing straight with crooked lines, another example of how good can come out of something which, at the time, could only be seen as evil. A lesson here for our lives, too.

There are striking parallels here between Joseph and Jesus. Jesus also was sold and betrayed by brothers in Israel into the hands of a foreign power. He forgave them (“Father, they do not know what they are doing”) and, because of their actions, he became the Saviour of so many.

Like Joseph, Jesus took “the form of a slave” but went even further in the utter emptying of himself on the cross.

Joseph became rich in money and power; we have become rich, not with money or power, but in love and grace because of the poverty, destitution and sufferings of our Lord.

The Jerusalem Bible makes the following comment:

This narrative, unlike what has gone before, proceeds without any visible divine intervention and without any new revelation; it is one long lesson: Providence thwarts men’s plots and turns their malice to profit... Betrayed by his brothers, Joseph is rescued by God who makes the betrayal itself serve the divine purpose, for its result – the arrival of Jacob’s sons in Egypt – is the first step in the making of a chosen people. This theme of salvation (“the survival of a numerous people”, 50:20) runs through the whole of the Old Testament to be enriched in the New. Here, as later with the Exodus, we have a preliminary sketch of the Redemption.

All in all, the story of Joseph is one of the most touching and most human in the whole of the Bible. Next to David, Joseph must be one of the most attractive personalities in the Hebrew Testament. The whole story is well worth reading. The two passages we have in our liturgy do not do justice to the whole account.

Gospel (Matthew 10:7-15)

We continue the apostolic discourse of Jesus to his disciples.

Jesus now instructs them on what they are to say and do. They are to proclaim that the kingship of God is close at hand. This, of course, is true because of the presence and work of Jesus. Jesus is himself the very embodiment of the Kingdom, he is the ultimate Kingdom person. The kingship of God is fully present in him. But it will also be present in the Twelve who will do the same things that Jesus is doing: curing the sick, raising the dead, healing lepers, liberating people from evil spirits. Later, we will see the apostles doing all these things in the Acts of the Apostles and the Church continues to do these things.

Today, all of us are called to proclaim the kingship, the lordship of God by our words, actions and lifestyle. The Church is still called to bring healing into people's lives. We may not raise people literally from the dead; but there many who are virtually dead, though physically alive, and who need to be brought back to a fully human life.

Most of our societies today do not have lepers but we have, in every society, people who are marginalised and pushed out to the fringes. They need to be reintegrated.

There may be people in some places who are genuinely in the possession of evil spirits but there are far more who are in the grip of more mundane demons such as nicotine, alcohol and other drugs, who are caught up in the materialism, consumerism, hedonism and sexism of our time. They too need to be liberated.

Yes, there is a lot of work to be done – each one of us in our own way and in accordance with our gifts and life situation.

Jesus also tells his disciples to travel light. They are not to charge for their service. They are not to find their security in the possession of material things, especially money. To increase their freedom, they should go around with the absolute minimum. In our lives, possessions and our concern about them can be very inhibiting.

Of course, what Jesus does expect is that each person working for the Kingdom has his needs looked after by those he serves. This is where his security lies: in being sure of a place to sleep and food to eat. In return, the missionary brings the Lord’s peace to any home that offers hospitality. This is a vision of a society which is hard to find in our own day, although it is lived in varying degrees of commitment by religious in the Catholic Church and by some followers of other religions like Hinduism and Buddhism.

Mother Teresa's Sisters come pretty close to the Gospel vision as do the Little Sisters/Brothers of Charles de Foucauld. And that is really the meaning of the second half of today's passage. Mother Teresa once said: “I do own things but they do not own me.” That is where she differed from so many of us.

Jesus expects that the missionary to find a place to stay wherever he goes. And, once he finds one, he should stay there; he is not to be moving around looking for more desirable conditions. On the other hand, Jesus has hard words for those who refuse hospitality to his messengers. Shaking the dust from one’s feet was symbolical. The dust of any Gentile country was regarded as unclean. By implication so was the dust of an inhospitable home. The people of Sodom and Gomorrah will get off more lightly. (In the Middle East hospitality has always been important. Unfortunately, in our security-conscious urban Western world, it does not flourish. Largely, because of those unnecessary possessions which Jesus would liberate us from.)

There are two things for us to reflect on today:

First, where is our security? Are we burdened down by the things we own? Are we owned by them? How free are we to live a fully Christian life as envisioned by the Gospel? How free are we to do the things that Jesus says we should be doing: bringing healing and wholeness into people’s lives?

Secondly, what kind of hospitality do we give to those – whoever they are – who are generously doing the Lord's work? Or, if they are not Christians, who are doing the work of the Kingdom?

Week 14 | Friday

Genesis 46:1-7,28-30; Matthew 10:16-23

First Reading (Genesis 46:1-7,28-30)

After their emotional reunion with the brother they believed long dead, Joseph’s brothers return to their father, Jacob, laden with gifts and with an invitation for the whole extended family to return and live in the region of Goshen, on the east of the Nile in Egypt.

In today's reading we see Jacob (now being called by his given name, Israel) setting out from his home in Hebron to Egypt with all his family members and all his possessions. Hebron lay to the west of the Dead Sea.

Before leaving Canaan he offers sacrifice to the God of his father Isaac at Beer-Sheba, which lay to the west of the southern end of the Dead Seas and south of Hebron on the road to Egypt. Here God speaks to Jacob in a dream. It is the last of God’s appearances to the patriarchs. He commands Jacob to go down to Egypt (the Exodus is already in view) just as he had commanded Abraham to set out for Canaan. The move is clearly presented as God’s will and not just a family decision.

God promises Jacob his protection and tells him not to be afraid to go down to Egypt. There he will make Jacob and his descendants into a great nation.”I myself will go down to Egypt with you.” He also promises to bring Israel back to his ancestral land. Is there an ambiguity here with the name ‘Israel’? It can mean a promise to bring Jacob’s body back to Canaan for burial and also the promise that Israel, as a nation, will return to the Canaan after the Exodus.

And there is a promise that, in death, it will be Joseph, the son he thought he would never see again, who will close Jacob’s eyes.

Jacob’s sons, together with their wives and children come to take their father to Egypt in wagons provided by the Pharaoh. The whole family – brothers, wives, children, grandchildren all move to Egypt to settle there.

On the way, Judah, the eldest son, goes ahead to arrange that Joseph should meet his father at Goshen. Joseph, riding in his official chariot, goes to meet his father. One can imagine the feelings of the old man as he saw Joseph, the son he thought was long dead, arriving in a magnificent chariot befitting his rank.

Not surprisingly, it is a very emotional meeting. Joseph throws his arms around his father’s neck and weeps for a long time on his shoulder. Jacob says to his long-lost son: “Now I can die, now that I have seen you again, and seen you still alive.”

Later (not in our reading), Jacob and some of his sons will be introduced to the Pharaoh and are invited to settle in Goshen, which was situated in the north-east part of the Nile Delta, a place very suitable for sheep-grazing. Jacob’s sons were shepherds.

Once again we see how what originally seemed like tragedy turn out to be a source of blessing for so many. It may help us to take a second look at events in our lives in which we wondered where God was present. Often, we may have to wait before we see the final outcome. God, as we have said more than once before, loves to write our life story with crooked lines.

Gospel (Matthew 10:16-23)

Today's passage clearly reflects later experiences of the Church as, for instance, described in many parts of the Acts of the Apostles and, of course, in the later history of the Church. Matthew's gospel was written some 50 years after the death and resurrection of Christ and naturally reflects some experiences of this period. It is both a warning and a description of what has happened and continues to happen to the messengers of the Gospel.

We are sent out like sheep among wolves. We are in a way defenceless because we renounce any use of violence. There are wolves out there eager to destroy us because, despite our message of love, justice and peace, we are seen as a threat to their activities and ambitions.

We are to be clever as snakes and innocent as doves. We are to be as inventive and creative as we can be in dealing with the world; but innocent, not in the sense of being naive but in the sense of being completely free of even any suspicion of wrongdoing. The end does not justify the means!

As has happened so many times and continues to happen, followers of Christ, simply because they are his followers and for no other reason, will be hauled into court, will be the victims of intimidation and torture. This is our opportunity to give witness to Christ and everything that the Gospel stands for.

“When they hand you over” – a favourite Gospel expression: John the Baptist was handed over, Jesus himself was handed over first to the leaders of his people and then to the Romans, his disciples too will be and are handed over and, in every Eucharist, we hear that Jesus in his Body is handed over to us (“this is my Body, which is given up [tradetur, handed over] for you”).

When we are ‘handed over’ we are not to be anxious what to say.”You will be given what you are to say.” This has been confirmed again and again by people who have been arrested and interrogated. Not only do they know what to say but very often their fear, too, disappears. So that, once released, they simply go back to what they were doing when they were first arrested. (We see this in the Acts of the Apostles.) “You yourselves will not be the speakers; the Spirit of your Father will be speaking in you.” The enemies of the Gospel have no ultimate answer to truth, love and justice.

The last words of Jesus are sad because they are true. The following of Christ can break up families. They betray each other, hand each other over. Once baptised, we enter a new family with new obligations. Our commitment to God, to love, to truth, to justice, to freedom transcends obligations that arise from blood. I cannot obey a father who tells me to violate the Gospel; I cannot cooperate with a brother who urges me to do evil. It involves painful choices but the opposite would be, in the long run, worse.

“You will be hated by all on account of me.” It is a saying we can sometimes find difficult to accept. It is difficult to understand that the following of the loving and loveable Jesus can create such hostility and hatred.

“When they persecute you in one town, flee to the next.” We need to be clear that Jesus never tells us to go out of our way to seek persecution or to be hated. On the contrary, we are to make Christianity as attractive as possible. We want people to share our experience of knowing and being loved by Christ. One of the reasons why the Church spread so rapidly throughout the Roman world was precisely because of Christians fleeing from persecution. There comes a time, however, when we can run no further, or when it is clear we have to take a stand and cannot compromise.

Week 14 | Saturday

Genesis 49:29-33;50:15-24; Matthew 10:24-33

First Reading (Genesis 49:29-33;50:15-24)

We conclude our reading from the book of Genesis today.

We hear Jacob giving his final instructions before his death. He wants to be buried close to his ancestors, Abraham and Isaac with their wives.

“Bury me near my fathers, in the cave that is in the field of Ephron, the Hittite, in the cave in the field of Machpelah, opposite Mamre, in the land of Canaan, which Abraham bought from Ephron the Hittite as a burial plot. (We read about this purchase on Friday of Week 13.) There Abraham and his wife, Isaac and his wife and Jacob’s wife, Leah, were all buried.

Then Jacob, having given his final instructions to his sons, “drew his feet up into the bed and breathing his last was gathered to his people”. That is, he joined all of his ancestors in Sheol.

With the death of Jacob, the sons were full of trepidation that Joseph would now want to settle his accounts with his brothers for all they had done to him. They pre-empted any vengeful action by sending Joseph a message.

They quoted their father as telling them to go to Joseph and beg forgiveness for all the wrong they had done to him.”We beg you, forgive the crime of the servants of your father’s God.” Once again, Joseph weeps on the receiving their message.

They prostrated themselves before him and expressed their readiness to be his slaves. They need not have worried. Their prostration is another example of the prophetic dream which Joseph had shared with his brothers many years previously. And, ironically, in times to come, the Israelites will be reduced to virtual slavery in Egypt and this will trigger the Exodus.

They did not reckon with their brother; Joseph was a much bigger man than they.”Do not be afraid; is it for me to put myself in God’s place?”

He then tells them that all the evil they planned against him has, in God’s plan, been turned to good and has resulted in the liberation of many people. Joseph then promises to provide for them and all their dependants. It was now the brothers’ turn to be deeply touched by the magnanimity of someone who could, with some justification, have made things very nasty for them. We see here a clear pre-figuring of the teaching and example of Jesus later on. His teaching on the love of enemies, turning the other cheek and forgiving seventy times seven.

This may well be said to be the central lesson of the whole Joseph story. A lesson which we can apply to unpleasant experiences in our own lives. As Paul says, “Everything works together for the good of those who love God.” And probably it is only when we love God that we can understand the place of the evil and the tragic in our lives.

From now on, Joseph stays with his own family and lives to be 110 years old, long enough to see many of his grandchildren.

It is now his time to leave the world. He tells his brothers he is confident that God will look kindly on them and, in time, bring them back from Egypt to the land he had promised to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in perpetuity.

And finally he asks his brothers to swear an oath that his bones be taken back to be buried with his fathers. This will not in fact happen until centuries later when Moses, mindful of Joseph’s last wish, will take Joseph’s bones with him as the Israelites begin their long trek to the Promised Land (cf. Exod 13:19). Joseph’s bones were eventually “buried at Shechem in the tract of land that Jacob bought… from the sons of Hamor” (Jos 24:32; see Gen 33:19).

The last verse of Genesis, which is not in our reading, says: “And Joseph died, being 110 years old; he was embalmed and placed in a coffin in Egypt.” For the Egyptians the number 110 was seen as the perfect life span and would signify divine blessings on Joseph.

Note too that the very last word of the book is “Egypt” and is the setting for the opening of the next book, the Exodus, and the next stage in the history of God’s People.

In the coming weeks we will be reading passages from that great saga.

Gospel (Matthew 10:24-33)

We continue Jesus' apostolic discourse to his apostles and all those who do the work of evangelisation.

a, He reminds them very clearly that they can expect no better treatment than he himself received.”The disciple is not superior to his teacher.” All in all, Christians are to show no surprise at violence and abuse against them. But, at times, it can be hard to understand. However, if they treated the Master and Lord in this way, his followers can expect no better treatment. If the Master is called the Prince of Devils, how much more those of his family! Remember what Jesus had said earlier: “Blessed, fortunate are those who suffer persecution for the sake of the Gospel.”

b, Much of Jesus' teaching to his disciples was done quietly and away from the crowds. He frequently told both people he cured and demons not to speak about him. Even his disciples were not to reveal his identity as Messiah. People at that stage were not ready and could have misinterpreted the true meaning of his teaching.

Also his message could not be fully understood until he had completed his mission through his passion, death and resurrection. Only that would put his teaching into its proper context.

But, in the course of time, it will be all made public. Later on it will be the duty of his disciples to deliver the message in its entirety and without fear. The Christian community, although it does consist of initiates with a way of life that is not always understood by outsiders, has no secrets. The ‘mysteries’ that Paul and others speak of are truths, previously unknown, which have been revealed. They are not like those of the so-called ‘mystery religions’ of the time or of secretive societies in our own. The message of Christ is to be made known to all in its entirety, even in hostile environments.

c, Some of those who proclaim the Gospel are going to be threatened even with losing their lives, a fact that is testified to by a long list of martyrs (martyr = witness) over the centuries. Jesus is saying that physical death is not the worst thing that can happen to a person. It is a reality we are all going to have to face sooner or later anyway. Far worse than physical death is the “loss of one's soul”, that is, the death of one's integrity. There are some values which transcend our physical survival. To betray such a value in order to live a bit longer is to lose one's soul. Thomas More understood this, so did Oscar Romero and many, many others.

Jesus is telling us that, even though we may, as he himself did, lose our lives, he will be with us. To be unfaithful to our deepest beliefs and convictions is a fate worse than death.

Week 15 | Monday

Exodus 1:8-14,22; Matthew 10:34-11:1

First Reading (Exodus 1:8-14,22)

Immediately following the end of Genesis, we move into reading the next book of the Pentateuch, the book of the Exodus (in Greek, ) or the ‘Going Out’. The ‘Going In’ was partially realised by the crossing of the Jordan River into the Promised Land but only fully completed with the resurrection and ascension of the crucified Jesus the Christ.

The book tells of the departure of the Israelites from a life of slavery in Egypt. We saw that the last word in Genesis was ‘Egypt’. However, a long period has passed since the death of Joseph and the present plight of God’s People under the Pharaohs. The book recounts the oppression by the Egyptians of the ever-increasing descendants of Jacob followed by their miraculous deliverance by God through Moses, who led them across the Red Sea to Mount Sinai where they entered into a special covenant with the Lord.

These events were of prime importance to the Chosen People, who became an independent nation having a unique relationship with God. Through Moses God gave to the Israelites at Mount Sinai the "Law": the moral, civil and ritual legislation by which they were to become a holy people, in whom the promise of a Saviour for all mankind would be fulfilled.

We will spend the next three weeks going through this book. There are two central themes:

the deliverance from slavery in Egypt (1:1-15:21) and

the Covenant on Sinai (19:1-40:38).

Connecting these two is the secondary theme of the Journey through the Wilderness (15:22-18:27).

The central figure is Moses, arguably Israel’s greatest prophet. It is he who will lead his people out of the bondage in Egypt to the foot of Mount Sinai. There, in a majestic and dramatic setting, God makes a solemn alliance with his people and hands down his law, the law which is at the heart of Israel’s life and around which the whole of Old Testament revolves.

At the end of Genesis we saw how Joseph had brought his people to live in Egypt under very favourable conditions. The opening paragraph of Exodus makes the link between that time and the present. The 11 brothers of Joseph, the sons of Jacob-Israel, had settled in Egypt and we are told that Jacob altogether had 70 direct descendants (literally, ‘coming from the loins of Jacob’), presumably by a multiplicity of wives.

Now, some 400 years later the situation has changed. “A new king, who knew nothing of Joseph" had come to power. Pharaoh, in Egyptian, is Per-aa, meaning ‘the great House’and was the usual designation of the Palace or the Court but, from the 18th Dynasty onwards, referred to the king’s own person.

He resented the growing numbers and the increasing power of the Hebrews in his kingdom.”The Israelite people are growing, more so than we ourselves!” He saw them as a possible threat to the integrity of his kingdom. Their increase had to be stopped, otherwise, in time of war, they might take sides with the enemy and “leave our country”. The implication is that an important source of slave labour would be lost. Ironically, they would in fact leave the country but with the help of an ally the Pharaoh had not taken into account.

It was the beginning of the long and sad story of anti-Semitism and of all kinds of racial and ethnic discrimination which is by no means a thing of the past some 3,000 years later.

The Pharaoh took two steps to subjugate the Hebrew: first, they were reduced to doing forced labour under Egyptian taskmasters. For their massive undertakings oriental kings in general always used forced labour. In Israel, David was to do so (2 Sam 20:24) and Solomon even more so in his building of the Temple. The Hebrews were involved in major construction projects, specifically, the building of the supply or store cities of Pithom and Rameses. Rameses was the residence in the Nile Delta of Pharaoh Rameses II. It is now identified with either the contemporary town of Tanis or Qantir.

Yet, the greater the oppression, the more the Hebrew population increased. As a result, the working conditions became even more severe and the Hebrews were virtually reduced to slavery and doing the most difficult work.

It is part of our reading but it is interesting to note that the Hebrew midwives were told that, when they were attending a birth, they were to kill the boys but the girls could live. The midwives, however, “feared God” and disobeyed the ruling. When called to account, they replied that the Hebrew women were so strong and healthy the child was already born before the midwife arrived!

Finally, the Pharaoh gave the order that all Hebrew boys were to be drowned in the river but, again, the girls could be spared. The “river” refers either to the Nile or one of its tributaries.

The stage is being set for the birth of one particular boy – Moses, and God’s intervention on behalf of his suffering people.

Gospel (Matthew 10:34-11:1)

We come to the final part of Jesus' apostolic discourse in chapter 10.

At a first reading, today's passage could be puzzling, not to say highly disturbing, to some. Jesus seems to contradict everything that he has said and done so far. “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth: it is not peace I have come to bring but the sword.” But do we not call Jesus the Prince of Peace? Does Jesus not say during the Last Supper discourse in John's gospel that he has come to give his peace to his disciples, a peace that no one will ever be able to take away from them? (John 14:27)

And Jesus goes on to apply to himself a passage from the prophet Micah (7:6): “For I have come to set ‘a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. A man's enemies will be those of his own household’.” It sounds a terrible thing for Jesus our Saviour to be saying. But it expresses not what he wants to happen but what he sees as an inevitable outcome of his message of love. It says more about us than about him.

Unfortunately, what Jesus says has only been confirmed again and again. We have mentioned before the paradox that the message of Jesus about truth, love, justice and freedom for people everywhere is seen by some as highly subversive and dangerous. And people who subscribe to this vision of Jesus and try to implement it in their lives are likely to run into headlong opposition with those who have a totally different vision of life and who see Jesus’ vision as a real threat to their interests. In a world of conflicting ideologies, philosophies, cultures, traditions, ethnic and religious identities, to declare that one is opting for the Way of Jesus is often to invite opposition, persecution and even death.

What Jesus says here is a fact – and was already a known experience when this gospel was written. Christianity divided families and, in some places, it still does. But people who see and understand and accept the vision of life that Jesus offers know they have no choice but to follow it, even if close family members object. To go with Christ is to enter a new family, with new bonds. A family which, for its part, does not at all reject those who reject it. The Christian may be hounded and hated and expelled by family members but that is not the way he/she is going to respond to them. On the contrary, the dearest wish of the new Christian is that his family members will be able to see what he sees and, until they do, he will pray for them, bless them and love them.

Jesus then goes on to lay down the conditions necessary to be a genuine disciple. “Anyone who prefers father or mother to me is not worthy of me.” In many cultures – in Asia for instance – this is a hard saying and seems to fly in the face of the filial piety and respect for the authority of elders which is at the heart of such societies.

It is not, in fact, in conflict. Love and respect for family members is a very high value for the Christian but there are even higher values which may take precedence. Filial piety and parental authority can be very inward-looking, too centred on just this group of people. Racial, national and religious identity can also be very narrow and intolerant in its understanding.

Christianity is outward-looking and realises that there are people out there whose needs are even prior to those of my family. To the Christian his blood family are only some among many brothers and sisters who have to be loved, served and cared for. One is also never bound to follow family requirements which would be against truth, love, justice, honesty... As a Christian, I cannot obey a parent or other family member who practices dishonesty in business, who cheats, who sexually abuses, who practices racism or narrow-minded nationalism and the like and urges me to do the same.

Jesus, as the Word of God, stands for a level of truth and integrity and love which is the ultimate measure of all that I do and say. I cannot conform to the wishes of anyone, however close, who falls short of that measure. But my Christian love and concern for that person will not be diminished, in spite of how I may be treated.

To live like this can at time involve pain, separation, intense suffering and even death. This, I think, is what Jesus means when he says that I am not worthy of him unless I am willing to take my cross and walk with him. There is a price to be paid for being true and loving and just. This also is what he means by ‘finding’ live and ‘losing’ my life. To ‘find’ life is to take the easy way of accommodation and compromise, not to mention material gain and pleasure; to ‘lose’ is to let go and let Jesus take charge.

Of course, as Jesus points out, in the long run it is the ‘losers’ who find and the ‘finders’ who lose.

The discourse ends with some advice about finding Jesus in other people, especially his own followers. Anyone who welcomes a follower of Jesus, whether that person is a ‘prophet’ (a missionary) or a ‘holy man’ (an ordinary Christian) welcomes Jesus himself and welcomes the Father also. Even to give a cup of cold water to a Christian because he is a Christian will not go unrewarded.

The discourse is then clearly brought to an end by Matthew saying, “When Jesus had finished instructing his twelve disciples he moved on from there to teach and preach in their towns.”

Week 15 | Tuesday

Exodus 2:1-15; Matthew 11:20-24

First Reading (Exodus 2:1-15)

Having heard described the difficult situation in which the Hebrews were living in Egypt, we are now introduced to the hero of our story.

He was born of parents who both came from the tribe of Levi, the tribe which would form the priestly caste in Israel, through his brother Aaron, whom we will meet later on.

As all male children were to be drowned at birth, the baby – who does not yet have a name – was hidden by his mother for three months. However, the bigger he grew the more difficult it would be to hide him, so she took the drastic step of waterproofing a basket and sent it floating down the river – the Nile or one of its branches.

The Hebrew word for ‘basket’ here means literally a ‘chest’ or an ‘ark’ and is the word used in Genesis for Noah’s ark. Unlike Noah’s ark, of course, this basket would have been made of papyrus stalks. Both ‘vessels’ were to be the source of salvation for God’s people and it is not difficult to extend the image to the saving waters of baptism.

In a clearly providential happening, the Pharaoh’s daughter and her retinue had gone to the river to bathe. The floating child is found and immediately recognised as a Hebrew (was he circumcised?) and she was full of pity for the abandoned baby. Moses’ aunt who had been watching the whole affair innocently came forward and offered to find a Hebrew woman to wet-nurse the baby. She brought the child’s own mother who was appointed to nurse the child.

When the boy had grown, he was adopted by Pharaoh’s daughter. This probably happened when the child was weaned or a little later. He was given the name Moses because, as Pharaoh’s daughter said, “I drew him out of the water.” Actually, ‘Moses’ in Hebrew is mosheh but the word translated ‘draw out’ is mashah. The words are not linguistically connected and it is rather a play on words (something we have frequently seen in one of the authors of Genesis). In fact, the name is probably derived from an Egyptian word of “has been born”, referring the birth to a god thought to be his sponsor.

Then we are suddenly brought to a time when Moses was already a grown man. In the Acts of the Apostles, Stephen during his trial states that Moses was 40 when he took leadership of his people (Acts 7:23) and, when he later was bargaining with the Pharaoh, Exodus says he was 80 years old (cf. Ex 7:7). Ancient historians, Josephus and Philo give legendary details of Moses’ education. Stephen in the same speech observes that Moses was “educated in all the lore of Egypt”. Obviously, too, he is fully aware of his Hebrew identity, which he no doubt learnt secretly from his mother who nursed him

He could not but be aware of the way his people were being maltreated and, once on seeing an Egyptian strike, probably flogging but perhaps even killing, a Hebrew, he killed the man and buried the body, hoping that he had not been seen.

Later he scolded two Hebrews who were fighting among themselves, telling them that was no way to win their freedom. They, however, turned on him and asked if he was going to kill them in the same way he had killed the Egyptian. Moses, aware that his secret was out and that it had even reached the Pharaoh's ears (there was a warrant out for his execution) fled into hiding and stayed in the land of Midian.

Midian lies to the south of Edom and to the east of the Gulf of Aqaba in what is now the southern tip of Israel. The Midianites are connected in Genesis (25:1-4) with a group of Arab tribes descended from Keturah, one of Abraham’s wives. The Jerusalem Bible tells us

These nomads frequented the highways of Palestine, and of the Sinai peninsula; they raided as far afield as Moab, where they later came to blows with the Hebrews. They were to be soundly beaten by Gideon. At “the end of times” Midian will come and pay homage to Yahweh (Is 60:6).

Later, Moses would indeed liberate his people but in a very different and unexpected way.

Gospel (Matthew 11:20-24)

After the apostolic discourse of chap 10, Matthew goes back to narrative. In two passages preceding today's Jesus reassures the disciples of John the Baptist that he is indeed the “one who is to come”, that is, the Messiah and Saviour-King.

This is followed by a passage where Jesus complains of those who close their minds to God's word. John the Baptist led the life of an ascetic in the wilderness and they did not listen to him. Jesus socialised freely with all kinds of people and they accused him of being a glutton and a drunkard.

So today Jesus warns three towns where he spent much of his time: Chorazin, Bethsaida and especially Capernaum. If Jesus had done in the pagan towns of Tyre and Sidon what he had down in these predominantly Israelite towns, they would have converted long ago. Even Sodom, the biblical image of the very worst in immorality, would have done better.

It is important for us to realise that, in today's Gospel, Jesus is primarily speaking to us today. If many non-Christians had been given the opportunities that we have received through our membership of the Christian community, they could very well be living much more generously than we do. To what extent are we listening to God's word? How much of it do we try to understand? And how much of it is reflected in our lifestyle? Are we clearly and obviously followers of Christ and his Way?

Week 15 | Wednesday

Exodus 3:1-6,9-12; Matthew 11:25-27

First Reading (Exodus 3:1-6,9-12)

Yesterday we left Moses lying low in Midian, a fugitive from the law.

One day, as he was seated by a well, the seven daughters of a priest of Midian came to draw water for the sheep’s drinking troughs. When the girls were driven away by some shepherds, Moses came to their defence and even watered their flock for them.

When they got home, they explained to their father, Reuel, how an ‘Egyptian’ came to their assistance and even drew the water for their flock. (It is interesting that the daughters referred to Moses as an ‘Egyptian’ and not as a Hebrew.) The father immediately told them to bring Moses to the house and share their hospitality. Moses ended up staying with them and Reuel gave his daughter, Zipporah, in marriage to him. (Another example of a marriage resulting from an encounter at a well.)

Moses and Zipporah then had a son who was named Gershom, because Moses had said: “I am a stranger in a foreign land.” The name is explained as if it came from the Hebrew word ger, ‘stranger’ joined to the Hebrew word sham, ‘there’.

In the meantime, the Pharaoh died but the sufferings of the Hebrews continued and, as they cried out to God for help, he remembered his covenant with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. And so we are led into the beginning of the Exodus story and of its protagonist, Moses.

Today’s reading begins by telling us that one day, as Moses was looking after the sheep of his father-in-law, Jethro, he came to the mountain of God, Horeb. Jethro is another name for Reuel and in Judges he is called Hobab. Horeb is called the ‘mountain of God’ because of the divine apparitions which took place there, such as on this occasion and when the Israelites were there after they had left Egypt.

Suddenly an angel of the Lord appeared to him from the flames of a bush which was on fire. It is God himself who has become visible to human eyes. The visual form under which God appeared and spoke to humans is referred to indifferently in some Old Testament texts either as ‘God’s angel’ or as ‘God himself’. Moses was surprised that, although on fire, the bush was not burning away. He was drawn to take a closer look at this strange phenomenon.

As Moses approached the bush, God called out from the centre of the bush: “Moses! Moses!” To which Moses replied: “Here I am.” Moses is told not to come any nearer and to remove his shoes because he is on holy ground. The voice then identifies itself: “I am the God of your father. I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob.”

Moses immediately hid his face because he knew he could not look face to face at God. The appearance of God caused fear and death, since it was believed that no one could see God and live.

We remember how Jacob, on the occasion of his wrestling with a strange man, later realised it had been God himself. Later, he exclaimed: “I have seen God face to face, yet my life has been spared” (Gen 32:30).

In the Gospel, Jesus will also use the term “the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob” in contesting the Sadducees’ denial of life after death. “Have you not read what God said to you, ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob’? He is the God of the living, not of the dead.” Of course, it may be that the term, when used at the time of the Exodus, was used to distinguish the God in whom the Hebrews believed from the gods of other neighbouring peoples. The concept of One God of the whole Universe was yet to develop. By the time of the Gospel, such a universal God was accepted by the Hebrews.

In verses omitted from our reading, God assures Moses that he is fully aware of the sufferings of his people in Egypt and of their treatment by Egyptian slave drivers. He will now come to their rescue and “lead them out of that land into a good and spacious land, a land flowing with milk and honey”.

The first step in this operation will be for Moses to go to the Pharaoh and to lead his people out of Egypt. Moses hears this assignment with great alarm; after all, although he grew up in the royal palace, he is now a man on the run because of a murder he committed. As a fugitive from the Pharaoh, he could hardly hope to carry out a mission to him. In addition, he must have remembered that on one occasion when he tried to intervene in a quarrel between two Hebrews, they challenged his authority.

But God guarantees his support and his protection: “I will be with you.” And there will be accompanying testimony to prove the validity of Moses’mission, “proof that it is I who have sent you”. “When you bring my people out of Egypt, you will worship God on this very mountain.” Right now, in Egypt that seemed a very remote possibility for the Hebrews.

Let us today ask ourselves what mission we have been given by God as our contribution to building the Kingdom. And, if, like Moses, we are only too conscious of our shortcomings, let us remember that one of the greatest prophets of Israel was a man who had committed murder, even if that murder was in defence of fellow-Hebrews. God, unlike society, does not look at our past but at our present and future potential.

Gospel (Matthew 11:25-27)

Yesterday we saw Jesus severely chiding the people of three cities where he had shown many signs of his divine origin for their slowness to believe in and accept him. Today he speaks with warmth and praise of those who have become his followers.

He remarks, in a prayer he makes to his Father, that it is not the learned and clever, the Scribes and Pharisees, the religious experts, but “the merest children”, his disciples, who have been graced with understanding the secrets of the Kingdom. They are children not only in their lack of learning and sophistication but also in their openness to hear and learn, a virtue lacking in those who regarded themselves as intellectuals.

This was in fact a reflection on the actual development of the early Church. It was a grassroots movement which spread most among the lower levels of society and among slaves. It would not be until later that Christianity spread to the higher echelons and become the faith also of the ruling elite and the intellectual classes. As Jesus says today, “Yes, Father, for that is what is pleased you to do.”

In growing and spreading in this way, Christianity showed, first, that it was really the work of God. It worked against powerful forces which tried very hard to obliterate it but in the end the power of truth and love were too strong for even the strongest opponents.

Second, it revealed the truly catholic nature of the Christian faith. It was never an exclusive domain of either the political or educated elite. It has appealed and continues to appeal to people at every level of society from intellectual giants like Augustine, Thomas Aquinas and John Henry Newman to the totally illiterate. Both can sit side by side and together hear the Gospel and celebrate the Eucharist.

Finally, Jesus suggests that knowing him and, through him, knowing the Father is a gift that he gives. We can all, of course, open ourselves to that gift. Why some of us do and others do not is something we cannot understand in this life. It is a gift which is offered, never imposed and again no one can know who are those who have been offered it and turned it down.

Let us today thank God that we have been among those who have listened and accepted and been graced. But we know we have a lot more listening and accepting yet to do. Jesus stands at our door and knocks today and every day. It is up to me to what extent I open that door and let him come in.

Week 15 | Thursday

Exodus 3:11-20; Matthew 11:28-30

First Reading (Exodus 3:11-20)

We are still with Moses as he speaks with God at the burning bush.

God has asked Moses to be the leader of his people to rescue them from their life of slavery and hardship in Egypt. And Moses has heard this with some alarm. He feels unsuited to such a huge task. He is wanted by the Pharaoh for the murder of an Egyptian and he had angry words with some of his countrymen, making his acceptance even by his own people not very likely.

But God assures Moses that he will be with him all the way and the confirmation will come when the Hebrews will one day worship their God on Mount Horeb.

However, Moses is still not at ease with the proposed mission. If he tells the people that the God of their fathers has sent him and they ask “What is his name?”, what is he to tell them?

He wants to know what credentials he can bring to justify his being leader and the truth of his message. He asks God to give his name as proof. To know a person's name was to have a certain power over them; to know the name of a deity was to be sure of a hearing. By being able to give God's name, Moses would be able to claim a certain authority.

God replies, “I AM who I AM.” And Moses is to say to the people, “I AM sent me to you.” He is to say that it is “the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, has sent me to you.” Further, “‘I AM’”is my name forever”.

In a sense God's words say everything and they say nothing. The Israelites are being given a name they can use but it does not give them, as with pagan gods, a power over God. That they cannot have.

Later philosophers, of course, were to see in the name the assertion of pure and infinite Being. God simply is and everything else that is comes from him. But it is not likely that the authors of Exodus had reached that level of insight.

The phrase ‘I am who I am’ apparently is the source of the word ‘Yahweh’, the proper personal name of the God of Israel. Out of reverence for this name, the term ‘Adonai’, “my Lord” was later used as a substitute. The word ‘Lord’ in many translations represents this traditional usage. The word ‘Jehovah’ arose from a false reading of this name as it is written in the current Hebrew text.

We do not hesitate to use the word ‘God’ in our speech but we should avoid any disrespectful use of any name of God or any persons of the Trinity, something which is all too common nowadays. Often it betrays ignorance rather than malice. It is an ignorance of the deepest nature of God’s being. It was Thomas Aquinas who said we are only learning to know God when we realise that he cannot be known. And when we use his name blasphemously, it is ourselves we hurt, not him.

The Jerusalem Bible has a lengthy comment on the phrase:

According to the Yahwistic tradition the worship of Yahweh went back to the days before the Flood. According to the Priestly tradition Yahweh revealed himself to the patriarchs under the name El-Shaddai (cf.. Gen 17:1+); Exod 6:2-3. In this passage which belongs to the Elohistic tradition, it is at this time that God reveals the name of Yahweh; by this name he wishes to be invoked in future by the children of Israel. This narrative, a peak of Old Testament revelation, presents two difficulties: the first is philological – the etymology of the name Yahweh; the second is exegetical and theological – the meaning of the narrative as a whole and the significance of the revelation that it conveys.

1. The etymology: attempts have been made to explain the name Yahweh (abridged forms like Yaho, Yah, etc are found in both biblical and non-biblical texts) from various Hebrew roots but there seems little doubt that it is an archaic form of the verb 'to be'.

2. The interpretation:

a. it may be that Yahweh is used here to imply the impossibility of giving an adequate definition of God. In semitic thought, knowledge of a name gave power over the thing named; to know a god's name was to be able to call on him and be certain of a hearing. The true God does not make himself man’s slave in this way by revealing a name expressive of his essence; this refusal to reveal is contained in the formula Ehyeh asher ehyeh (‘I am who I am’) which, in the third person, becomes Yahweh, ‘He is’. Understood in this fashion the name does not define God; nevertheless, for Israel it will always call to mind God's great deliverance of his chosen people and the divine generosity, fidelity and power that prompted it. In Christian thought this interpretation brings out the transcendence of a God for whom man can never find a worthy name.

b. Tradition, however, following the Septuagint, has commonly preferred to take Ehyeh asher ehyeh as meaning ‘I am the One who is’, ‘I am who I am’; the name Yahweh, ‘He is’, would then express not necessarily the absolute nature of God's essence as a later philosophy and theology were to state it, but least God's unlimited existence as opposed to the 'nothingness' of the gods, cf. Is 42:8+.

Moses is then told the message he is to bring to the Hebrews. The elders of the people, as their representatives, are to be called together. They are to be told that the God of their ancestors has appeared to Moses. He has told Moses of his concern for the people’s sufferings and has decided to lead them out into “the land of the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites – a land flowing with milk and honey”.

God assures Moses that the people will heed his message. Then he and the elders are to approach the Pharaoh. They will convey the following warning: Their God has sent the Hebrews a message. They will ask to be allowed to make a three days’ journey into the desert so that they can offer sacrifice to their God.

But God knows that the Pharaoh will not give his permission for this unless his hand is forced. In that case, God will stretch out his hand and do “wondrous deeds” there, a reference to the Ten Plagues which will eventually force the Pharaoh’s hand. After that he will let them go.

Over the centuries, philosophers and theologians have led us to very deep understanding of the nature of God. We also learn much about God from the revelation that comes to us through Jesus Christ. Much of what Jesus reveals goes far beyond what we might come to know by reason alone.

To know our God ever more deeply and become closer to him and his way of seeing life is really the only thing that matters.

Gospel (Matthew 11:28-30)

The Gospel in many of its passages is very demanding and requires an unconditional commitment to the following of Christ. We have seen that clearly in the contrast Jesus made between the demands of the Law and what he expected from his followers. But, again and again, that is balanced by the other side of God – his compassion and his understanding of our weakness and frailty.

Today he invites “all you who labour and are overburdened and I will give you rest”. He seems to be referring to the burden of the Law and the many other legalistic observances which had accumulated over the generations. In fact there was a common rabbinic metaphor which spoke of the ‘yoke of the Law’. We will see some of this in the two remaining readings of this week. Jesus did not have much time for this kind of religion. He invites us to come to him instead and experience comfort and consolation.

Jesus invites us to take on his yoke instead. A yoke can be heavy but it makes it easier for the ox to pull the cart or the plough. Jesus’ yoke is the yoke of love. On the one hand, it restricts us from acting in certain ways but at the same time it points us in the right direction. In the long run, it has a liberating effect. It is not unlike the idea of the “narrow door” which Jesus invites us to go through rather than follow the wide road to nowhere.

Jesus asks us to learn from him in his gentleness and humility. This was in stark contrast to the severity and arrogance of other religious leaders. Not only are we to experience the gentleness of Jesus, we are also to practise it in our own dealings with others.

I think it is commentator William Barclay who offers another lovely idea. It was quite common to have double yokes when two animals pulled a vehicle together. Barclay suggests that Jesus is offering to share his yoke with us. He and I will pull together and he will share the burden with me. In either case, he assures us that his yoke is easy and his burden is light.

Jesus expects us to give all of ourselves to him but, when we do so, we discover that what he asks is absolutely right for us. To follow Jesus is not to carry a great weight but to experience a great sense of liberation.

If we have not found that experience yet then we are not yet carrying the yoke of Jesus.

Week 15 | Friday

Exodus 11:10-12:14; Matthew 12:1-8

First Reading (Exodus 11:10-12:14)

We have skipped several chapters of Exodus to come to today's reading.

The sufferings of the Hebrews became intolerable and eventually God sent what we call the Ten Plagues on Egypt in order to persuade the Pharaoh to let the Hebrews leave. After each one, his heart hardened and he refused to the let God’s people go.

The Ten Plagues were as follows:

1, Water turned into blood (most likely caused by a plant which discoloured the water).

2, An infestation of frogs which penetrated every place and every home.

3, An infestation of gnats (mosquitoes?) on man and beast alike.

4, A plague of flies.

5, An epidemic which attacked all the livestock of the Egyptians, but not those of the Hebrews.

6, An epidemic of boils on humans and beasts.

7, A fall of hail, accompanied by thunder and lightning, which killed everyone and every animal that was in the open air.

8, A plague of locusts which devoured every plant which had survived the previous plagues.

9, Total darkness for three days.

10, The killing of all the first-born of the Egyptians, from the Pharaoh to the lowliest slave.

Most of these ‘plagues’ actually correspond to natural phenomena found in Egypt. But they are represented here as supernatural at least in their greater intensity and in their occurring exactly according to Moses’ command. In each of the plagues, the Hebrews were not affected, another sign of God’s intervention in what would normally be natural calamities affecting everyone.

With these plagues we are coming to the great finale and the high point of the Exodus story. Nine plagues inflicted on Egypt have not softened Pharaoh's heart and “he would not let the Israelites leave his land”.

The Hebrews are now told to prepare for the final catastrophe with which God will strike the Egyptians. As our reading opens, the Tenth Plague has not yet taken place. Once again, “the Lord made the Pharaoh obstinate”. It is as if, in the eyes of the author, God wanted the Pharaoh to be hard-hearted, so that eventually the situation would become so bad that he would have no alternative.

The passage we read today is not really a historical account of how the Hebrews actually prepared for that last night in Egypt. It consists rather of formal instructions to a later generation on how to celebrate the great event that is about to take place. The instructions are presented as coming from God to Moses and Aaron.

First, the month in which it is taking place is from now on to be regarded as the first month of the year. It is the month of Abib, meaning the month of ‘young corn’ or ‘ripe grain’. It occurred around the time of the spring equinox, in a period between March and April in our Gregorian calendar. After the Exile it came to be known by the Babylonian name of Nisan, the name used in later books of the Old Testament e.g. Nehemiah 2:1 and Esther 3:7.

First, on the 10th day of that month each family is to procure for itself a lamb. If a family is too small to finish one lamb, then it can join with another family and they can share the lamb between them, including perhaps the cost of purchasing it. The lamb must be male, one year old and free from any blemish. It may be a sheep or a goat (in fact, sheep and goats are closely related animals).

The animal is to be kept until the 14th day of the month, then it is to be slaughtered in the presence of all the assembled Hebrews. This should happen “between two evenings”. This was understood as either between sunset and darkness (the Samaritans) or between afternoon and sunset (the Pharisees and the Talmud).

In every house where the lamb is to be eaten, its blood is to be applied on the doorposts and lintel of the house. This, in a way, was the most important requirement.

On the night of the 14th day of the month, the same evening on which it had been slaughtered, the roasted flesh of the lamb will be eaten with unleavened bread and bitter herbs.

The animal is to be roasted, not to be eaten raw or boiled, and the whole animal, including head, limbs and internal organs is to be roasted as one.

Nothing must be kept over till the following morning. Anything that is uneaten is to be burnt. This was to preclude any possible profanation of something regarded as ‘holy’. The Greek text adds “You shall not break a bone of it”, a requirement mentioned in further instructions in the same chapter (12:46). In John’s account of Jesus’ passion, he notes that the soldiers, seeing that Jesus was already dead, pierced his side with a lance but did not break his legs, as they did with the other two men being crucified, and then quotes from this part of Exodus: “Break none of his bones”. This happened because Jesus was the Paschal Lamb of the New Covenant.

Then follow instructions for the way the meal is to be conducted:

It is to be eaten standing, with loins girt (that is, with clothes belted), wearing sandals and with a walking staff in one hand. In other words, the meal is to be taken like people preparing to make a hasty departure.

And it is to be called the Passover of the Lord. The origin of the word is disputed. The word pesah (Greek, pascha, ) means that Yahweh ‘leaped over’ the marked houses, as one might skip names on a list. The word may be originally from the Egyptian, pesach, meaning ‘the blow’, that is, the final plague which is about to happen. Both meanings, obviously, are applicable.

On this very night, the Lord would go through Egypt and strike down every first-born in the land, humans and animals alike, and thus pass judgement on all the gods of Egypt. But, because the blood of the lambs has been painted on all the houses of the Hebrews, when the Lord sees the blood, he will pass over, or skip over, those houses and no harm will come to them. Hence the name of the feast.

Then comes the final instruction to Hebrews of every future generation: “This day shall be a memorial feast for you, which all your generations shall celebrate with pilgrimage to the Lord, as a perpetual institution.” An instruction which Jews continue to observe to this day.

For us Christians all this has great meaning because we see in it a foreshadowing of another Passover which Jesus celebrated with his disciples. It took place at the same time as the celebration of the traditional Jewish Passover but, because of what immediately followed, it was seen as the sacramental anticipation of the new Passover in which Jesus is the Sacrificial Lamb whose blood poured out becomes the instrument of our salvation and liberation.

It is significant that, in the descriptions of the Last Supper, no gospel mentions the lamb as the main dish. There is now a New Passover Lamb – Jesus himself. And in the eating of the Bread and the drinking of the Wine, those present had ‘eaten’ and ‘drunk’ of the Lamb.

So this passage from Exodus is the First Reading of the liturgy on Holy Thursday.

It might be noted, too, that some Catholics now celebrate during the earlier part of Holy Week a ‘seder meal’ which is a re-enactment of the Hebrew paschal supper, at which there will be cooked lamb, unleavened bread, wine and bitter herbs.

Finally, the Jerusalem Bible has the following comment on the feast:

The long section of the Passover and the feast of the Unleavened Bread (12:1-13:16) combines the Yahwistic and the Priestly traditions and some editorial additions the style of which is ‘Deuteronomic’. With this passage should be compared the liturgical calendars of Leviticus 23:5-8, Deuteronomy 16:1-8, and the legislation of Numbers 28:16-25. The two rites may have had separate origins: the Passover is primarily a pastoral feast, offering the first-fruits of the flock; the feast of Unleavened Bread is primarily agricultural, offering the first-fruits of the barley harvest. But they were both springtime festivals and became fused at a very early date. Once associated with a historical occurrence, that decisive event in the history of Israel's election, the deliverance out of Egypt, these rites took on an entirely new religious significance: they recalled how God had saved his people, cf. the explanatory formula accompanying the rite, 12:26-27; 13:8. The Jewish Passover hence becomes a rehearsal for the Christian Passover: the Lamb of God, Christ, is sacrificed (the cross) and eaten (the Last Supper) within the framework of the Jewish Passover (the first Holy Week). Thus he brings salvation to the world; and the mystical re-enactment of this redemptive act becomes the central feature of the Christian liturgy, organised round the Mass which is at once sacrifice and sacrificial meal. (edited)

Gospel (Matthew 12:1-8)

Today's story follows immediately on yesterday's words of Jesus inviting those carrying heavy burdens to come to him for comfort and relief. Those burdens were understood to be the yoke of the Law which could weight so heavily on the ordinary person. Today we see what kind of burdens it entailed.

Jesus and his disciples are walking through a cornfield. The disciples were feeling a little hungry so they began plucking ears of corn to eat. Nothing wrong with that. Gleaning, especially where the poor were concerned, was not regarded as stealing. “When you go through your neighbour’s grainfield, you may pick some of the ears with your hand, but do not put a sickle to your neighbour’s grain” (Deuteronomy 23:26).

Yet the Pharisees criticised the disciples’ behaviour before Jesus. They were not upset by the plucking of the corn but because it was done a sabbath day. Most manual work was forbidden on the sabbath, including for instance, reaping. So we read in Exodus: “For six days you may work, but on the seventh day you shall rest; on that day you must rest even during the seasons of ploughing and harvesting” (Exodus 34:21). The question that would come immediately to the legalistic mind would be what exactly constituted harvesting. In the minds of the Pharisees, who would put the strictest interpretation in order to be on the safe side, what the disciples were doing contravened the Sabbath requirements.

Jesus would have none of this nonsense. He gave two examples which the Pharisees would find difficult to criticise:

First, David's soldiers, because they were hungry, went into the house of God and ate the loaves of proposition, that is, bread which was laid out as an offering to God. According to the law, only the priests were allowed to eat this bread.

Second, he pointed to the priests on temple duty who not only worked on the sabbath but did more work than usual on that day (like priests today!). Yet no one found fault with them.

Jesus has two further and more powerful arguments:

- He calls his accusers’ attention to a saying from the prophet Hosea (Hos 6:6): “It is mercy I desire, not sacrifice.” What this means is that the measure of our behaviour in God's eyes is not our observance of law but the degree of love and compassion we have for our brothers and sisters. Laws are for people; people are not for laws. That is why a truly loving act always transcends any law. If the Pharisees had fully understood the meaning of Hosea's words, they would not have “condemned these innocent men”.

- Finally, Jesus simply says, “The Son of Man is indeed the Lord of the sabbath.” Jesus as Lord is not bound by even the God-given laws of Israel. If, in the eyes of Jesus, his disciples are innocent, then they are innocent.

Every time we read texts like this we have to look at how we as Christians behave both individually and corporately. Legalism and small-mindedness can very easily infect our Catholic life. We can start measuring people – including ourselves but especially others – by the observance or non-observance of things which really have little to do with the substance of our Christian faith. Of course, we can also go to the other extreme of having no rules at all.

There is a very demanding law to which we are all called to subscribe and that is the law of love. It allows of no exceptions. But its practice can only benefit both the giver and the receiver.

Week 15 | Saturday

Exodus 12:37-42; Matthew 12:14-21

First Reading (Exodus 12:37-42)

Yesterday's reading about the celebration of the Passover is followed by instructions on the feast of Unleavened Bread and other instructions on the observance of the Passover. The book then goes back to the narrative and, considering its climactic role, gives a rather brief account of the Tenth and most terrible Plague, the killing of all the first-born Egyptian children and animals.

Pharaoh now had enough and ordered Moses and Aaron to leave with all their people, their herds and their possessions.

Today's passage describes the beginning of the long journey out of Egypt to the Promised Land by way of Mount Sinai. The journey began in the city of Rameses in the very north of Egypt, where the Hebrews had been employed virtually as slaves in the Pharaoh’s great construction works. They set off for Succoth which lay to the south-east about half way between Rameses and the Sea of Reeds.

The numbers were estimated to be 600,000 men, not counting children. There was also a crowd of “mixed ancestry” with them. These were probably the result of mixed marriages between the Hebrews and the native Egyptians. They also brought with them numerous flocks of sheep and goats and herds of cattle.

However, they had left in such a rush that the flour they had with them had no time to be leavened, so they made bread with the unleavened flour. This is another tradition of the origin of the use of unleavened bread as part of the Passover celebration. They left in such a rush that they did not even have time to prepare any proper food for their journey.

It was the end of a long sojourn in Egypt – estimated by the Bible as 430 years – from the time Joseph had first invited his family to settle there. The day they left was said to be the exact anniversary date of their arrival. It was seen as the greatest event in the history of Israel.

They had also started on their journey by night so future celebrations of the event were forever more to be observed by a vigil.”This was a night vigil for the Lord, as he led them out of the land of Egypt; so on this same night all the Israelites must keep a vigil for the Lord throughout their generations.”

And, as we have seen, it will be the foreshadowing of a much greater Passover, a more significant vigil to come – the Christian Easter Vigil.

Gospel (Matthew 12:14-21)

Jesus is becoming a figure of controversy. We saw yesterday how he was accused by Pharisees of condoning the breaking of the sabbath on the part of his disciples. Far from apologising, Jesus defended his followers and implied that he himself was greater than the Law. Immediately afterwards he went to a synagogue and, in spite of a challenge about healing on the sabbath, went ahead and cured a physically handicapped man.

At the end of this story, Matthew says, “The Pharisees went out and began to plot against him, discussing how to destroy him.” He was seen as a severe threat to their authority. And that is where our reading begins today.

Jesus was fully aware of their plotting and so he disappeared from sight for a while. We should be clear that Jesus did not go out of his way to confront and attack people. Still less was his behaviour deliberately designed to create trouble for himself. There are people like that; they go out of their way to make trouble for others and for themselves. Jesus never behaved in such a way. He did not want to attack or be attacked by certain people. He did not deliberately engineer his own sufferings and death; quite the contrary. So now, as things get hot for him, he withdraws for a while.

At this point, Matthew, who, we remember is writing for a Jewish readership, shows how Jesus’ behaviour corresponds to a prophecy in the Old Testament. This is something he does a number of times.

The passage is from the prophet Isaiah (42:1-4) and it shows Jesus as full of the Spirit of God campaigning for justice for peoples everywhere. He is the servant whom God has chosen, “my beloved in whom I delight”. He is no demagogue shouting from a soapbox.”He will not contend or cry out, nor will anyone hear his voice in the streets.” He moves around quietly and, at the same time, is tolerant and understanding of the weak. His behaviour is described beautifully as, "The bruised reed he will not crush; the smouldering wick he will not quench."

We, too, are called to live and proclaim the Gospel without compromise but to do so without any taint of arrogance or bullying and, at the same time, with patience and understanding for those who are not yet ready to answer Jesus' call.

Week 16 | Monday

Exodus 14:5-18; Matthew 12:38-42

First Reading (Exodus 14:5-18)

At the end of last week we saw the Israelites setting out on their escape journey out of Egypt. The story is interrupted by a number of religious instructions for later generations arising out of the Exodus experience including regulations for the Passover, the consecration of the first-born to the Lord, and the feast of the Unleavened Bread.

When the story of the departure is taken up again we are told that God instructed the people not to follow the shortest route through the land of the Philistines along the shores of the Mediterranean to Canaan. This was the objective of their journey, the Promised Land. Instead they were told to follow a more roundabout way through the “wilderness to the Sea of Reeds”. The reason given was that to go that way would have involved a lot of fighting with the local people. It will eventually take them 40 event-filled years before they will reach their objective

We are also told that on their journey Yahweh’s accompanying presence was indicated by a pillar of cloud during the day and a pillar of fire during the night. In this way they could travel both day and night. It is possibly one and the same preternatural phenomenon, a central nucleus of fire surrounded by smoke; only at night was its luminous nature visible.

Both cloud and fire are regularly symbols of God’s presence in the Scriptures. We saw Moses talking with God in a burning bush. In the Gospel, during the Transfiguration, God’ presence is shown by the cloud that comes down on the three apostles and Jesus, at his ascension, is taken up into a cloud. At Pentecost, God’s presence is indicated by the tongues of fire on each one present.

The erratic route followed by the Israelites gave the impression that they were lost in the wilderness leading the Pharaoh to change his mind and go in pursuit of them. This was all part of God’s plan.

It is at this point we pick up today's reading.

When the Pharaoh heard that the Hebrews had fled, he and his officials changed their minds about letting them go. They suddenly realised that they were going to lose a major work force for their construction projects.

So the Egyptians set out in pursuit with the cream of their armed forces, 600 first-class chariots and all the other chariots of Egypt, all carrying soldiers. God had made the Pharaoh so obstinate that he went in pursuit of the Hebrews who were marching away in triumph with their God behind them. The Egyptian forces caught up with the Hebrews in their encampment by the sea at Pi-hahiroth, facing Baal-Zephon. These places have not been definitively identified and even their position related to each is not clear. Perhaps the former was on the west shore of the sea, where the Israelites were, and the latter on the opposite shore.

Pharaoh was almost on top of them when the Hebrews became aware of their presence. Filled with alarm, they cried out to their Lord for help.

They then turned on their leader, Moses, as the scapegoat for their problem.”Were there no burial places back in Egypt that you had to bring us to this place to die?” They even begin saying that they did not want to leave Egypt at all and were ready to keep working for the Egyptians. Better to be slaves in Egypt than die a horrible death in the desert. It was typical of people who judge a situation only by what they can see immediately in front of them. It was also one of the first of many examples of their lack of trust in God and in his chosen messenger, Moses.

Moses then reassured them. If they will only stand their ground, they will witness the victory the Lord has planned for them. The Egyptians who are pursuing them now will soon never be seen by them again.”The Lord himself will fight for you; you have only to keep still.”

The Lord himself now intervenes and asks why the people are crying out to him. Do they not trust him and his promises? He then gives his instructions. First, the Israelites are to continue going forward in the direction of the sea. Second, Moses is to raise his staff over the sea and divide it in two so that the Israelites can walk through it on dry land. Third, God will make the Pharaoh and the Egyptians so obstinate that they will go in pursuit.

We are not yet told exactly what is going to happen to the Egyptians but that God will receive glory through what happens to Pharaoh, his army and all his chariots. The result will be that the Egyptians will now realise that Yahweh is Lord.

The lesson all through is that God is with his people, protecting and leading them. Even when they seem to be in deep trouble, he is there. They sometimes can see no light at the end of the tunnel but the light is there and it is God.

Gospel (Matthew 12:38-42)

Today's passage follows two others, which we have not read. In the first Jesus is accused of doing what he does by the power of Satan. An accusation which he easily shows is self-contradictory and makes no sense. In the second he says that a tree that is rotten inside cannot produce good fruit. Goodness comes from a person's interior. The words are directed at his accusers whom he more than once accuses of being hypocrites: pious and law-abiding on the outside and full of malice inside.

It is these same people who approach him today. It is difficult to know their mood as they ask Jesus for a sign. Is it a genuine request for Jesus to indicate the source of his authority and power or is it a hostile demand for Jesus to present his credentials?

In response, Jesus first says that “it is an evil and unfaithful (literally, ‘adulterous’) generation that asks for a sign”. Yes, evil and unfaithful, because for anyone with an open mind, Jesus has been giving nothing but signs ever since he began his public life. The ordinary people have been full of praise and amazement at what Jesus is doing and say that “God has visited his people”. But these leaders, blinded by their own prejudice, are even saying that the teaching, exorcisms and healings of Jesus are the work of Satan.

In addition to all this they are going to get an unmistakable sign of who Jesus really is. They will be given the “sign of Jonah”. Just as Jonah spent three days buried in the belly of the sea monster so the Son of Man will be in the heart of the earth for three days and nights. This is a clear reference to Jesus’ resurrection – the conclusive sign of his identity and power.

Mention of Jonah leads Jesus to say that the people of Niniveh who repented after hearing Jonah will fare better at the last judgment than the people that Jesus is speaking with. And Jesus is of far more significance than Jonah.

Similarly, the Queen of the South, that is, the Queen of Sheba, who came from a far distance to hear the wisdom of Solomon will fare better than the unbelieving listeners to Jesus, who is greater by far than Solomon.

We, too, have the privilege of listening to Jesus and we know the sign of his resurrection. Is it not possible that there are many people around us who, not knowing Jesus but following the guidance of their consciences, will find themselves going before us into the Kingdom? Complacency is probably one of our biggest temptations.”I am good enough; I observe the basic requirements of my religion.” Is that all that Jesus expects of me?

Week 16 | Tuesday

Exodus 14:21-15:1; Matthew 12:46=50

First Reading (Exodus 14:21-15:1)

Following on yesterday's reading we see today the great moment when Moses, at the Lord’s command, separated the waters and the Israelites walked across on dry land.

Just before this (not in our reading) Exodus tells us that God’s protecting angel which had been leading the Israelites now moves to protect their rear. Similarly, the pillar of cloud, the visible sign of Yahweh’s presence, which had been leading the people from the front now moved to the rear to be between the Israelites and the Egyptians. And, before night fell, the cloud became dark so that the two sides could not see each other and come in contact.

It was now, in obedience to the Lord’s command, that Moses stretched out his hand over the Sea of Reeds. A strong east wind began to blow all through the night and turned the sea into dry land. The Israelites then marched right into the sea on dry land with the waters piled like a wall to their right and to their left.

The Egyptians with all their horses, chariots and charioteers went in pursuit right into the sea. It was then that the Lord struck: “Just before dawn the Lord cast through the column of the fiery cloud upon the Egyptian force a glance that threw it into a panic.” Moreover, the wheels of the chariots bogged down on the soft bottom of the sea so that they could hardly move.

Seeing the situation, that their God was supporting the Israelites, the Egyptians immediately sounded a retreat. But it was too late. The Lord told Moses to stretch out his hand once more for the sea to flow back. Immediately the sea began to return to its normal depth. The Egyptians were thrown back into the surging waters. The whole army of the Pharaoh, chariots and charioteers were drowned. Not one man escaped.

In this way, the Lord rescued his people from the hands of the Egyptians. When the Israelites saw the bodies of the drowned Egyptians lying on the seashore, they were made aware of the great power the Lord had shown against the Egyptians.

The scene is a film director’s dream and it is no wonder that the story has been re-enacted in more than one film epic over the years.

On seeing all that had happened and how they had been rescued from certain capture and death, “The Israelites feared the Lord and believed in him and in his servant Moses.” However, it was a faith that would have many ups and downs, as we shall see.

Then Moses and all the people broke out into a marvellous hymn of praise and thanksgiving. Our reading ends with just the opening verse of the hymn:

I will sing to the Lord, for he is gloriously triumphant;

horse and rider he has cast into the sea.”

It is a long and magnificent hymn (Exodus 15:1-18) well worth reading in full. It is a whole psalm of thanksgiving (the first and most famous of the ‘canticles’ which the Christian liturgy takes from the Old Testament). Its starting point is the destruction of Pharaoh's army but it goes on to develop the theme of God's power and his care for his people; the wonders of the Exodus, the conquest of Canaan, even the building of the Temple in Jerusalem – all indicating it is a much later composition.

Parts of it probably sound rather aggressive and triumphalist to our ears today but the underlying theme is a realisation of God's awesome power and thanksgiving for his protection in times of danger. Verses from it form the response to the reading for yesterday and today and it is also used during the Easter Vigil liturgy.

As the Jerusalem Bible notes, “Old Testament tradition consistently regards the ‘crossing of the Red Sea’ as one of the most, if not the most striking evidence of Yahweh's intervention on behalf of his people. The episode is equally prominent in Christian tradition from the New Testament onwards, as a figure of the decisive ‘exodus’ effected by Jesus, and particularly of the baptism by which the Christian enters into it, (cf. 1 Cor 10:1 – ‘Our fathers were all under the cloud and all passed through the sea; by the cloud and the sea all of them were baptised into Moses…’).” In the waters of baptism – more significantly when it is by total immersion – we pass through the saving waters to life in Christ.

The idea running all through both in the Old and New Testaments is liberation; God makes his people free. He liberates us from slavery of all kinds.

To be honest, am I as a Christian experiencing that liberation and sense of freedom in my life? If not, why not?

Gospel (Matthew 12:46-50)

Just before we enter the third great discourse which are on the parables of the Kingdom, we have today's short passage on who really belong to Jesus.

As Jesus was speaking to the crowds his mother and other family members arrived.”They were standing outside and were anxious to have a word with him.” Matthew does not say what that word was but we know from another context that they were embarrassed by what he was doing, probably because of the way he was earning the displeasure of the authorities. In later times, many who opted to follow Christ have been a source of embarrassment and displeasure to their families, especially in situations where being Christian or Catholic was a violation of state law or religious affiliation.

When Jesus is told they are looking for him he stretches out his hands to his followers and says that they are his “mother and brothers”. And then he defines how one becomes one of his brothers and sisters: “Anyone who does the will of my Father in heaven, he is my brother and sister and mother.”

It is significant that Jesus’ own blood relatives are spoken of as being “outside”; Jesus’ disciples, those who really listen to him, are those who are “inside”. This is not to say that Jesus is rejecting his family; to do so would be to contradict his own teaching of loving all unconditionally. But he uses the situation to make a very important point: namely, that relationship to Jesus is based on one thing only, total commitment through Jesus to the Father.

To be a Christian, a disciple, is to enter into this new relationship with God and with others. All other bonds, including those of blood, take a second place or are to be understood in the light of this bonding to God first of all and above all.

It would be wrong to conclude that Jesus was rejecting his own mother here. Yet what he says applies to her as much as to anyone else. Mary is measured by her commitment to the Father and the Son, who is also her Son. That commitment was clearly made when she accepted to be the mother of Jesus, “Let it happen to me according to your word.” It was a commitment that was still being kept as she stood in grief at the foot of her Son’s cross. Mary was certainly on the “inside”.

Let us ask her today that we, too, may always be ‘insiders’.

Week 16 | Wednesday

Exodus 16:1-5,9-15; Matthew 13:1-9

First Reading (Exodus 16:1-5,9-15)

After crossing the Sea of Reeds in safety, the Israelites begin their long, meandering journey to the promised land.

In spite of all that God had done for them, they began complaining first of all about their water situation. There was water but it was too bitter to drink. They discovered it could be made drinkable by throwing a certain kind of wood into it. God also told them that if they acted properly and observed the Lord’s precepts they would not experience any of the problems which had afflicted the Egyptians. They reached an oasis called Elim, an oasis with twelve water springs and 70 palm trees. There they had an abundance of water and shelter.

Then, as we see in today's reading, they set off again and arrived in the desert of Sin, which lay about half way between Elim and Sinai and was clearly not a very hospitable terrain. They were following a route close to the eastern shore of the sea they had crossed earlier. It was the 15th day of the second month, just one month since they had escaped from Egypt. (They had eaten the Passover meal and left Egypt on the 15th day of the first month, Abib, later known as Nisan.)

Once again the grumbling started. They spoke with nostalgia of the “fleshpots” of Egypt and the abundance of food they had when they lived there. Apparently, all the hardships from which they were so anxious to escape, were now all forgotten. And, once again, they laid all the blame on Moses for bringing them to a place where they could only die of starvation.

A patient God heard their complaint and told Moses of his plan to rain down ‘bread’ from heaven on them every day. As a gift from God, the manna was said to come from the sky. It may, in fact, have been something similar to a natural substance still found in small quantities on the Sinai peninsula, but here it is, at least in part, clearly miraculous.

However, there were some rules to test their obedience to God’s law. Each day they were to pick just what they needed and no more; and, on the day before the sabbath, they were to pick a double portion. Clearly, there was to be no gathering of manna on the sabbath.

This message was passed on by Moses to Aaron who announced it to the people. And, just then, “the glory of the Lord appeared in the cloud”. This was the cloud which was accompanying them on their journey, the pledge of God’s closeness to them. What form this manifestation took we do not know but the messages was clearly understood by the Israelites and intended to put a stop to their grumbling.

And once again the Lord spoke with Moses. He was to tell the people that, from now on, in the evening they would have their fill of meat and in the morning their fill of ‘bread’. Sure enough, that evening a flock of quails came and covered the camp and, in the morning, they saw what looked like hoarfrost all over the ground. When they first saw it, they asked: “What is that?” and were told by Moses, “This is the bread which the Lord has given you to eat.” ‘What is that?’ is represented in Hebrew as man hu and is taken to be the origin of the word ‘manna’.

We are told that flights of quail are common over Sinai and that, as mentioned, the manna was possibly the juice of some local shrub. However, the narrative intends some special intervention under natural forms by which God fed his people.

The Psalms and the Book of Wisdom gratefully recall the gift of manna which, in Christian tradition (as early as John 6:26-58), is a figure of the Eucharist, the spiritual food of the Church, the new Israel, on her earthly journey to the Promised Land. Jesus will refer to the manna as a type of the Bread that he will give, cf. John 6:32,49-52.

We have since taken over phrases like, “I will now rain down bread from heaven on you” and “This is the bread which the Lord has given you to eat” and given them Eucharistic significance.

What is made clear in the story is that the source of the food (and indeed of all we have and receive) is a compassionate and caring God, one who is largely deaf to his people’s constant complaints, their short memories of former help and protection and their weak faith.

We too so often suffer from the same weaknesses. It is so easy to be aware of our grievances and to forget the wonderful blessings we have received in life.

Let us count our blessings today and say a big Thank You to our God and Lord.

Gospel (Matthew 13:1-9)

Parables of the Kingdom

Today we come to the third of the five discourses of Jesus found in Matthew's gospel. It consists entirely of parables about the Kingdom of Heaven, as Matthew calls it. It might be helpful to go back to Monday of the 10th Week and look again at what is said there about the meaning of ‘Kingdom of heaven’. Briefly to repeat, we are talking about, not a place and still less a place in the future life, but a network of people and communities who are committed to all that God is and stands for, as revealed to us through the life and teaching of Jesus. They are those who work that God’s will be done on earth, which is the establishment of the Kingdom.

These parables then are images that Jesus gives to help us understand how we are to enter into and become part of that Kingdom, of that kingship of God to which we adhere with all our heart and soul.

Our passage begins with Jesus leaving the house. Our reading leaves out the first phrase "That same day". What day? and What house? It seems that Matthew is linking the parables of the Kingdom with the scene we had yesterday about those who are on “inside” and those on the “outside”. The house – whose ownership is never referred to and we know that Jesus had no house of his own – seems to refer to any place where people are gathered together with Jesus.”Wherever two or three are gathered in my name, there I am among them” (Matthew 18:20). And wherever people are closely related with Jesus, not just physically but intentionally, that is to be on the “inside” and it is also to be part of the Kingdom.

We are told that the crowds wanting to listen to Jesus were so great that he had to use a boat moored near the shore to speak to them. In the Gospel, the boat also often represents the Church or the Christian community from which Jesus continues to speak his message to the world. We are also told that he spoke to them in parables. Once again, Matthew uses his favourite number by having seven of them. (Just to remind ourselves: there are 2x7 generations in Jesus’ genealogy, 7 Beatitudes, forgiveness not 7 but 77 times, 7 ‘alas’ in the condemnation of the Pharisees and his gospel divided into seven main sections – infancy, five discourses, passion.)

For three days, that is, for the rest of this week, we are going to be considering the first and the longest of the parables, the parable of the sower. First, today, we have the parable itself, then tomorrow some explanation of the role of parables in Jesus’ teaching and, finally on Saturday, an interpretation of the parable.

The parable itself is very straightforward. It speaks about a farmer sowing seed in his field, a typical Palestinian field of the time. It is obviously a very mixed patch of ground. There are paths going across it where people have long established a right of way. There are bits of rock sticking up above the ground with small hollows where water can gather after rain. Ploughing was done after the seed was sown so there are weeds and brambles growing wild all over the place. And then there are parts of the field which have good, fertile soil.

This image largely describes too the field in which Jesus the preacher and teacher is working. It provides very mixed soil and much of the seed does not go very far in producing fruit. All this has been described in what we have already seen of Jesus’ mission among the people, the religious leaders, his own family – and his disciples. It is these latter who are the fertile soil, these are the ones who will enter, who are already entering the Kingdom.

A parable in the Gospel usually makes just one point. In this case the message is that God’s plan will succeed, even though there seem to be setbacks. It was an important message for the early Christians to hear as it is for us today. It is a word of encouragement when Christians see how little success they seem to have at times in their evangelising work. The message is not to worry; God's Word will prevail, it will always find fertile soil in which to grow and multiply. Indeed, in the past, some communities did fail but overall the Christian communities grew and the message spread to every corner of the world.

And then there is the final exhortation: “Listen, anyone who has ears!” Listening and hearing are not the same. To hear is to be physically capable of picking up sound. To listen presumes attention and awareness; it implies understanding and acceptance and, ultimately, implementation of what is heard.

Am I ready to enter the Kingdom? What kind of soil do I present for the Lord's Word? Am I really listening to him in the fullest sense?

Week 16 | Thursday

Exodus 19:1-2,9-11,16-20; Matthew 13:10-17

First Reading (Exodus 19:1-2,9-11,16-20)

We begin today the story of the great encounter with Yahweh at Mount Sinai – a mountain whose exact location is in doubt. Its importance was in its holiness and not in its geographical location.

Tradition locates it in the southern region of the Sinai peninsula at Jebel Musa (2,500 m.) the northern rock-face of which dominates a barren plain surrounded by mountains: the locality admirably satisfies the data of the text. It was at Sinai, also called Horeb or ‘Mount of God’, that Moses received his vocation and had his second meeting with his father-in-law Jethro. At Sinai the Law was given and the Covenant concluded. At Sinai God placed himself at the head of his people for the journey to the Promised Land; it was to Sinai that Elijah the prophet returned as to the pure spring of divine revelation. Sinai also stands for the Old Covenant that was eventually superseded, Gal 4:24ff. (Jerusalem Bible, edited)

It was three months after leaving Egypt that the Israelites arrived in the desert of Sinai and set up camp there.

In a paragraph omitted from our reading, God speaks to Moses with a message for the people. He reminds them of all that he has done for them: “You have seen for yourselves how I treated the Egyptians and how I bore you up on eagle’s wings and brought you here to myself.” Though the whole earth belongs to God, if the Hebrews listen to his voice and observe the covenant he has made with them, they shall be his special possession, dearer to him than all other people.”You shall be to me a kingdom of priests, a holy nation.” ‘Holy’ here means ‘set apart’.

When Moses passed on the message to the people, they responded together: “Everything the Lord has said, we will do.” A promise they will continually make – and break.

We now go back to our reading. The Lord tells Moses that he is going to come to him in a thick cloud. When the people, who have grumbled so much against Moses, will hear God speaking to him [but not able to see anything], they will have their faith in him restored.

At the same time the people are told to prepare themselves on that day and the next. They are to wash their clothes and to be ready for the third day. Nor are they to have any sexual intercourse during these days. For, on the third day, the Lord would come down on Mount Sinai before the eyes of all the people.

On the third day, the great theophany takes place. God is not seen face to face but his presence is evident through all the symbolic signs of thunder and lightning, a heavy cloud and trumpet blasts.

Not surprisingly, the people are filled with fear and trembling. The thunderstorm is the chosen scene of God's self-manifestation; the gale is his herald's trumpet, the thunder his voice, the cloud and the fire the signs of his presence. Compare the encounter of Elijah with God in 1 Kgs 19:11-12.

The purpose of this theophany is not only to show God's mastery of nature but also his majesty, his sublimity and the religious awe that he inspires.

Moses then led the people to the foot of the mountain. God had earlier indicated the limits of their approach. Anyone who even touched the holy mountain itself was himself not even to be touched but to be killed remotely by stoning or by being shot with an arrow. This also applied to animals.

Mount Sinai was wrapped in smoke, because the Lord came down on it in fire. The smoke rose as if from a furnace and the whole mountain trembled violently, as if there was an earthquake. The trumpet blasts grew louder and louder, while Moses spoke with God and God replied with peals of thunder. ‘Thunder’ here may mean the voice of God, which sounded like thunder.

Finally, when God came down on the mountain he invited Moses to the top of the mountain and Moses went up to meet him. We are preparing for what is perhaps the most awesome moment in the whole of the Hebrew Testament. The stage is now set for God to communicate his Law to the people, the Law which will seal the covenant between the two sides (see note below). We see here the paradoxical remoteness of our transcendent God and, at the same time, his closeness in speaking intimately with Moses.

Obviously, the images here are not to be taken literally. They are intended to convey the awesomeness, the unapproachability and unknowability of God, his simultaneous transcendence and immanence.

Strangely, those who are most aware of this are those who have been closest to him, the great mystics like Teresa of Avila, John of the Cross, Ignatius Loyola. The nearer they come to God, the deeper their awareness of his total transcendence. Thomas Aquinas will also say that every statement made about God must be at once denied: God is Truth but not the truth that we can reach; God is Love but love far beyond our most intense experience of it. At the same time, God is closer to us than breathing and penetrates the deepest recesses of our being.

Where God is concerned, familiarity breeds awe – but not fear. It also generates an indescribable love.

Gospel (Matthew 13:10-17)

Parables of the Kingdom (cont’d)

Today's passage forms an interlude between the parable of the sower and its interpretation. Jesus is asked by his disciples why he speaks to the people in parables. The implication is that he does not speak in parables to his own disciples.

It would be possible to interpret Jesus' reply as meaning that he speaks clearly to his disciples but to the people in riddles because they are outsiders. This would seem to contradict the purpose of speaking in parables which is to use helpful and familiar images in order to lead towards a better understanding of a deeper message. (The parable of the sower is a good example.)

The Jerusalem Bible sees it somewhat differently: “Those who saw so dimly could be further blinded by the light of full revelation. Jesus, therefore, does not reveal with complete clarity the true nature of the messianic kingdom which is unostentatious. Instead he filters the light through symbols, the resulting half-light is nevertheless a grace from God, an invitation to ask for something better and accept something greater.”

It seems that we are dealing here again with the difference between ‘insiders’ and the ‘outsiders’. The ‘insiders’ are those who give Jesus a ready hearing. Naturally, they are more open to hear about the ‘mysteries’ of the kingdom and to assimilate what they hear. The ‘outsiders’, on the other hand, are precisely that because they have closed minds, they are not ready to listen.

In the particular context of Matthew’s gospel, those who refuse to listen are those who have rigidly bound themselves within the confines of the Mosaic Law and who refuse to listen to the message of Jesus which is a “fulfilment” as well as being a radical restatement of the Law and the proclamation of a totally new covenant in the person of Jesus as Messiah. Or, as the Jerusalem Bible puts it: “The ill-disposed will even lose what they have, namely, that Jewish Law which, without the perfection Christ brings to it, is destined to become obsolete.”

This gives meaning to the words which Jesus uses. Speaking of the ‘insiders’ he says, “To the one who has, more will be given until he grows rich; the one who has not, will lose what little he has.” Those who have opened themselves to the Word of God will find themselves evermore enriched, while those who have not even begun to accept the Word will end up in even a worse situation than they are now. Similarly, those to whom the parables are addressed, “look but do not see, listen but do not hear or understand”. This happens, not because the parables are difficult but because the hearers are not prepared to listen. In fact, they are, one might almost say, watered down and easily digestible versions of the full message.

And Jesus quotes words of Isaiah which are not meant to be understood as God deliberately blocking his Word reaching people; this would not make any sense. The prophet is better understand as speaking in a strongly sarcastic tone:

Listen as you will, you shall not understand,
look intently as you will, you shall not see.
Sluggish indeed is this people's heart
That is the problem.
They have scarcely heard with their ears,
they have firmly closed their eyes.
And why have they acted like this?
Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
and hear with their ears,
and understand with their hearts.
And what would be the result of that? They might turn back to me and I should heal them.

That is where the issue lies. If we are prepared to see and to listen, it will mean a radical change in our lives, in our attitudes, in our values and priorities, in our relationships. Many are not ready to have their lives turned upside down. They prefer to remain blind and deaf.

On the contrary, Jesus says to the ‘insiders’: “Blest are your eyes because they see [understand and accept] and blest are your ears because they hear [listen, accept and carry out].” And, to the extent that we have become ‘insiders’ with Christ, we too are deeply blessed. But we do need to be sensitive to our own tendencies not to see or not to listen because of our unreadiness to go all the way in our following Jesus, our reluctance to let go and make the changes in our lives he is asking of us. A note on the Covenant:

The covenant with Noah involved the whole human race. The Mosaic covenant will set its seal on God's choice of a nation and on the promises made to it, just as the covenant with Abraham, mentioned in Exod 6:5, seals the first promises, Gen 17. But the covenant of Abraham was made with a single individual (though also embracing his descendants) and imposed a single obligation, that of circumcision. The Sinaitic covenant binds the whole nation and the whole nation receives a Law: the Decalogue and the Book of the Covenant. This law with its subsequent elaborations is to become the charter of Judaism and Sirach 24:9-27 will identify it with wisdom. But the law is also ‘a witness against the nation’, Deut 31:26, because its transgression cancels the promises and invites God's condemnation. Its role, as at once instruction and deterrent, will be to prepare for the coming of Christ who concludes the New Covenant. St Paul will later expound this transitional function of the Law in answer to Christians who hanker after their old Jewish observance, Gal 3; Rom 7. (Jerusalem Bible, edited)

Week 16 | Friday

Exodus 20:1-17; Matthew 13:18-23

First Reading (Exodus 20:1-17)

Yesterday we saw Moses go up Mount Sinai at the invitation of Yahweh. God repeated his warnings about the people not approaching the mountain but made an exception when he told Moses to go down to the people and then return with his brother Aaron.

Immediately after this and with no introduction we are given the Ten Commandments and the Book of the Covenant, a book of laws dealing with matters of worship and moral behaviour. These are clearly developed documents and not to be understood as words literally dictated to Moses. They have been artificially inserted into the narrative here.

The Decalogue is the core of the Mosaic Law and hence is put at the beginning. In Matthew’s Sermon on the Mount, the Beatitudes hold an analogous position in the New Law of the New Moses. As instruction and deterrent the Decalogue is still valid in the New Law but Jesus pushes its interpretation to a much deeper level. St Paul's attack on the Law, in Romans and Galatians, is not directed against the essential teaching of these commandments but rather at the way they were being interpreted.

There is a dispute in the actual listing of the Ten Commandments, Catholics following one listing and many Protestants another. The First Commandment of Catholics is divided into two by Protestants. It is possible that each of the commandments was originally as short as the 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th and the enlargements for the other commandments may be due to editors.

We also normally divide the list into two sections: the first three dealing with God and the second seven dealing with the neighbour. Let us deal briefly with each one:

1. I am the Lord, your God, …you shall not have strange gods before me.

This is a clear call to the Israelites to believe only in their God, who was greater than all other gods, and to have nothing to do with any of the gods with whom they often came in contact through surrounding peoples. Only later will it be understood as a call to believe in a monotheistic God as the sole Cause of all, the Source of all being and the ultimate Goal and Meaning Centre of all our lives. In both understandings, there is no place for any “other gods” nor are such gods needed as intermediaries with the One God.

The prohibition against the carving of any idols meant that for the Jews – and for the Muslims after them – there could never be any image made of God himself, still less of anything else which could be made an object of worship. Both synagogue and mosque are totally free of any such image. However, from the earliest times, Christians did not interpret these words in such a strict fashion. In the catacombs we already see images of Christ (e.g. as the Good Shepherd). And, soon after that, images of even God the Father, the Holy Spirit, as well as of Mary, the martyrs and other saints.

With the coming of the Reformation and its theology about justification by faith alone and the rejection of sainthood, there was a return to the strict Jewish interpretation. Unfortunately, this resulted in the wholesale destruction of some of Europe's most beautiful works of art. Even today Catholics may be challenged by other Christians on the presence of images in their churches. It needs to be explained that these images have absolutely nothing in common with the idols mentioned in Exodus. They are not seen as gods, they are not worshipped. They are reminders of Christians who set an example which we could follow and be inspired by. They represent people who were and are still greatly loved. We do not pray to these statues or images but before them. We do ask those whom they represent to pray for us but they are not at all put on the same level as Jesus, the one and only Mediator. Catholics agree with all their Christian brothers and sisters about the unique mediatorship of Christ. But we also believe in the effectiveness of prayer of both the living and the dead on behalf of others. And we do believe in the inherent goodness, the result of grace, which these people enjoyed. It is good to know that the Catholic Church has come very close to a common understanding with some Reformation churches on the nature of ‘justification’.

The last paragraph of this commandment sometimes causes difficulties for people.”For I, the Lord, your God, am a jealous God, inflicting punishment for their fathers’ wickedness on the children of those who hate me, down to the third and fourth generation; but bestowing mercy down to the thousandth generation, on the children of those who love me and keep my commandments."

To our ears this sounds terribly vindictive. It is certainly not the kind of language we are used to from the Gospel of Jesus. We do have to remember it reflects the harsher thinking of a much earlier society. In many parts of the Bible God is spoken of in very anthropomorphic terms, that is, he is pictured as having the same kinds of feelings that people would have. To speak of God being jealous simply means that he does expect – as is his right and is for our good – that we give our whole selves to him unreservedly. And if children down to the third and fourth generation suffer because of the wickedness of their forebears this is less the direct act of God than the result of those forebears’ behaviour. Bad parents cannot produce good children. We see this constantly where children of dysfunctional families themselves produce dysfunctional families unless there is an intervening agent that can turn things round.

2. You shall not take the name of the Lord, your God, in vain.

This commandment follows naturally on the first. If God is seen as the Source and Goal of all being; if we see in him the Lord of our lives; if we believe in his transcendence and immanence, then we will approach him with the greatest respect. It would be unthinkable to use his name in a glib, disrespectful and insulting way. Not that such behaviour affects God in any way. We ourselves are the losers. To speak or act blasphemously towards God says a lot about me and the kind of person I am.

We often include under this commandment all kinds of foul language and the use of distorted names for God and other holy people and things. There is never any need to use such language but in parts of our society it has become almost de rigeur to make it part of every utterance. ‘F...’ words, ‘S...’ words and divine names are thrown around as a sign of being ‘tough’, ‘macho’ and ‘cool’. There is no need for us to be part of any of that. But, however objectionable, ‘bad’ language is not really intended by this commandment.

3. Remember to keep holy the sabbath day.

The biblical texts expressly connect the term ‘sabbath’ with a root meaning ‘to desist, to stop work’. The sabbath is a weekly day of rest dedicated to Yahweh who rested on the seventh day of creation. But while it does homage to God, it also benefits man. The sabbath is of very ancient origin but its observance gained particular importance after the Exile and became a distinctive mark of Judaism. A legalistic outlook took the joy out of the observance, leaving only a burden which Jesus was to remove – and which some puritanical Christians put back.

The observance of this commandment is another way by which we acknowledge the sovereignty of our God. We put aside the labours and concerns of six days each week and devote one to God. It is a sign of trust in his providential care for us. It is a time to pause and reflect on the direction and quality and meaning of our lives. It is a time to rest in the best sense of the word and not in the sense of dissipation.

Of course, in our Christian life the sabbath has become Sunday and its centre is the community celebration of the Eucharist, when, on the day of resurrection, we remember what God has done for us in Jesus Christ. It is also the weekly gathering of the Christian community when, through the rich symbolism of the liturgy, we remember who we are for each other and for the world in which we live.

As Exodus indicates, for the Hebrews it was a day of no physical work. In time, however, this ordinance became surrounded by a forest of casuistry as legal experts defined what and how much or how little came under the term ‘physical work’. We saw in a recent Gospel reading how Jesus disciples were charged with ‘reaping’ when they plucked some ears of corn as they walked through a field of grain on a sabbath day.

In the not so distant past, Catholics, too, were careful not to do unnecessary physical (called ‘servile’) work on Sundays. There was a certain level of casuistry here too. Sewing was wrong on Sundays but, for some reason, knitting was all right. Gardening was out but spending long hours in writing was acceptable. Now, in our urban societies it is often difficult to separate Sunday from the other days of the week. Maybe we should – where it is possible – try to make Sunday a quieter day, a contemplative day, a re-creation-al day.

We now come to the second set of seven commandments which are directed towards our relationships with other people. Except for one, they are all expressed in the negative, telling us what not to do.

4. Honour your father and your mother.

As givers of life and the people responsible for our nurturing through the years of infancy, childhood and adolescence, we owe a great deal to our parents, who may have had to work very hard to provide a good living and prepare us to make our own way in the world. Honour is the very least that they should be able to expect from us.

The problem is that many families are today what we call 'dysfunctional'. The parents are ill-equipped to carry out their responsibilities as they should or do so in an irresponsible manner. The children suffer in consequence. The observance of this commandment can become a problem.

In our day, too, I think we would also say that parents should honour their children. A good family can only be based on mutual respect, an acknowledgment of mutual rights and responsibilities. An easy flow of communication in both directions is essential. Miss Jean Brodie's dictum of “Do as I say, not as I do” is not to be recommended. Children are very sensitive to double standards. And, in the long run, parents will get the honour they deserve. Quoting commandments will not help very much.

5. You shall not kill.

It is stated so succinctly with no modifications. Taking another person's life is wrong. Is all killing included or only intentional killing, which we call murder? The age of the person is not indicated: the unborn baby, the dying elder, the terminally ill, even the serial killer. Are there any extenuating circumstances? Is self-defence one of them? When is my life worth more than someone else’s? Taken literally, this commandment does not affect the lives of most of us although, with issues like abortion and euthanasia, more and more people are involved in decisions over the lives of others. Jesus, as with many of the other commandments, will extend the meaning of the commandment to a much deeper and interior level.

6. You shall not commit adultery.

Is this the only sexual sin? It is the only one mentioned. In many older societies, the real objection to adultery was in the possibility of unrecognised illegitimate children being born to the mother; hence, the much more severe penalties for the adulterous wife. Purity of line was everything. And sex was not really the issue. Is it, in fact, a sexual sin? Is it not much more a sin of injustice, the stealing of what belongs, by sacred contract, to another and the violation of that contract by the adulterous married partner (or partners, if both are married). What pains a partner most when discovering that a partner has had sexual relations with a third party is not the sexual act but the unfaithfulness, the breach of trust.

For us, the commandment is now primarily seen as covering all kinds of ‘sexual’ sins. What constitutes a ‘sexual’ sin is now becoming more and more a matter of discussion and debate in all the churches and in our societies.

7. You shall not steal.

To steal is to take what rightfully belongs to another. The key word here is 'rightfully'. Simply because something is in my possession does not mean that I am the rightful owner. The starving man has a right to the surplus bread in my house. Much of what we call ‘mine’ should be called ‘ours’. The obscene imbalance between haves and have-nots (not to mention the ‘have lots’) in our societies and in the world generally points to wholesale stealing on a vast scale. It is a sin not only of individuals but of whole societies and whole communities.

8. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbour.

A person's good name is another form of property of which he should not be deprived. The commandment speaks about “false” witness, that is, saying things about someone which are simply not true or are misleading. I think that today we would also want to include the unnecessary but harmful dissemination of facts which are true. Gossip of both kinds is among our favourite pastimes.

9 and 10. You shall not cover your neighbour’s house… your neighbour’s wife, male or female slave, ox, ass, nor anything that belongs to him.

These two commandments can be put together. These commandments are against all forms of greed, simply wanting to have people or things just because they are there even though I have no right to or any real need for them. It was not covetousness for the beggar Lazarus to look longingly at the groaning table of food at which the rich man was dining. He had a right to and a need for that food. It seems that much of our marketing industry is based on arousing our covetous instincts, leading us buy things that we can well do without.

For us Christians the Decalogue is to be understood in the light of the Gospel, where Jesus calls for a much wider and more sensitive understanding of our relationship with God and with others.

Over the centuries, too, the Church has refined, in the light of what has been revealed to us in Christ, the full meaning of the Decalogue. I think we need to say that in itself there is nothing particularly Jewish or Christian about the Decalogue; it reflects values that can be found in all societies, especially those having a religious basis. And, therefore, by themselves they do not express fully the Christian vision of life. Yet we often hear Christians (including Catholics) point to the Decalogue as the basis of their faith. But it is not enough.

As mentioned when discussing the Sermon on the Mount, the Beatitudes really supplant and go far beyond what the Decalogue asks of us. Anyone who consciously lives the Beatitudes can simply forget about the Decalogue; it will be taken care of without further thought. The Decalogue follows a concept of religion primarily based on the observance of law; the Beatitudes are based on a concept of religion based on love. The word love is never mentioned in the Decalogue; it is more concerned with conformity. Many of the Ten Commandments can be observed by doing nothing – not killing, not stealing, not committing adultery. Christian witness and the building of the Kingdom expects much more than that.

Gospel (Matthew 13:18-23)

Parables of the Kingdom (cont’d)

We come today to the explanation of the parable of the sower. Perhaps we should rather say an interpretation. It is presented as coming from Jesus but it is likely to have come from the tradition of the early Church. There is quite a different emphasis between the original parable and this interpretation. The parable focuses on the sower and the ultimate and inevitable success of his work. The interpretation, however, looks much more at the soil in which the seed falls. The interpretation reflects the experiences of the early Church as it tried to spread the Gospel. The four different kinds of soil are taken to represent four kinds of responses to the Word of God which it has received.

The first kind is like the seed on the stony path. The Word of God never even gets started but gets plucked away by the evil influences by which the person is surrounded. In our strongly secular world today it is not easy for the Word to take root with so many competing enticements.

The second kind is like the seed that falls on the rock. The Word of God is received with great enthusiasm; the person becomes a devout and active Christian. But, if obstacles arise which make the living of the Christian life difficult, the person falls away, maybe quickly, maybe gradually. As the Gospel says, the person has no roots; the faith has not gone deep, it is has not been really assimilated. This must have been the case with many in the early Church who enthusiastically embraced Christianity but when persecution came, abandoned their faith. In our own time, we see this often enough when people, for instance, are removed from a protected environment where it is easy to live the faith to one where the faith is ignored or even ridiculed.

The third kind is like the seed that falls among the briars and brambles. I would suggest that a very large number of us are touched by this category. Anxieties about many things and the lure of material goods can gradually choke off our commitment to the Gospel in its fullness. Our witness becomes seriously compromised and “there is no yield”, that is, we make no real contribution to building the Kingdom and changing the world. We sit on the fence and try to have the best of both worlds; we try to serve God and mammon, which Jesus says is not possible. I am sure many of us have matter for reflection here.

Finally, there is the fourth kind of seed which falls on good soil. This is the one “who hears the message and takes it in”. These hear the Word, accept the Word, make it their own and it overflows into all they are and do and say. Much fruit for the world comes from such persons.

These four types can still be found and it is for each one of us to determine to which group we belong.

Week 16 | Saturday

Exodus 24:3-8; Matthew 13:24-30

First Reading (Exodus 24:3-8)

The giving of the Decalogue at Mount Sinai is followed in the book of Exodus by the Book of the Covenant, a list of ordinances and laws concerning subjects like the treatment of slaves, murder and injury, theft of animals, matters demanding compensation, duties towards enemies, the sabbath and great feasts.

Today’s reading gives us the solemn ratification of a covenant between God and his people based on the teaching that God has given to Moses.

After Moses had told the people of all the words and ordinances he had received from the Lord, the people answered with one voice: “We will do everything that the Lord has told us.” Moses then committed all the words of the Lord to writing.

Early the next day, he set up an altar with twelve pillars at the foot of the mountain, each pillar representing a tribe of Israel. God was symbolically represented by the altar and the people by the twelve pillars surrounding it.

He then sent young men to offer holocausts and sacrifices of young bulls as peace offerings to the Lord. By burning them completely, they indicated that they were being given back to God in their entirety.

Moses then took half of the blood of these animals and put it in large bowls. The rest of the blood he splashed on the altar.

He read the Book of the Covenant to all the people and again they replied: “All that the Lord has said, we will heed and do.”

Finally, he took the blood in the bowls and sprinkled it on the people, saying:

“This is the blood of the covenant which the Lord has made with you in accordance with all these words of his.”

In this way God and his people were united in one purpose. Their intentions were good but, as we shall see, they did not always live up to their solemn promises.

Moses here acts as mediator between God and the people, a priestly role. He unifies them symbolically by sprinkling the blood of a single victim first on the altar, which represents Yahweh, and then on the people. In this way the pact is ratified by blood.

We can see here foreshadowings of our own covenant sacrifice with God which we do through, with and in Jesus Christ. The “blood of the new covenant” is that of Jesus himself. The altar is the cross and the priest and victim are both Jesus. In the same way, the New Covenant is ratified by the blood of Christ.”This is my blood, the blood of the covenant, to be poured out in behalf of many for the forgiveness of sin” (Matt 26:28). Jesus pours out not the blood of animals but his own blood on the altar of the cross.

Like the Israelites of old, we many times fail to live up to the promises we make in our covenant with Christ. Indeed, we begin every Eucharist with the confession of our sins and failings.

As we celebrate this Eucharist today let us renew our covenant promises and beg Jesus to help us do so.

Gospel (Matthew 13:24-30)

Parables of the Kingdom (cont’d)

The next parable, which is only found in Matthew, is also about the planting of seed but the concern is quite different and again it reflects the experience of the early Church.

A man has sown good seed in his field but, unknown to him, an enemy has come and planted weeds among the wheat. As the plants come up the farmer sees the weeds growing all through his wheat. His slaves want to pull them out but the farmer tells them to wait until the harvest time. The wheat and the weeds are similar in appearance in the early stages and it will be much easier to differentiate them as they mature. In the meantime, let both grow side by side.

This is a picture of the Kingdom and also of the Church which is trying to be part of it. For the early Church more distressing in many ways than persecution from outside must have been betrayal and shortcomings on the inside. There would have been a strong temptation immediately to get rid of such people. But wiser heads prevailed. Wait. Let God be the judge and, in any case, people can change. The sinner of today may be the saint of tomorrow.

This has been a problem all through the history of the Church and today is no exception. There is always a strong temptation among those who feel themselves more committed to living out the Gospel to adopt an elitist approach to the faith. This can take two forms: either members who are seen as falling short of the Church's requirements in faith and behaviour are got rid of, or, which may be more common, those who see themselves more committed form a relatively closed group, a church within a church. There has been a certain amount of tension over such situations with the appearance of a number of Catholic movements in recent times.

Today's parable reminds us of something very important, namely, that the Church is and always will be a Church of sinners and for sinners. Our Church is, as Paul puts it, a vessel of clay, leaking and easily broken. At the same time, we have been called to help bring about the Kingdom in our world and we have constantly to try to do that. But we need to distinguish between the vessel and its contents, the weeds and the wheat, to distinguish between the Christian vision and the Church which tries to communicate it.

Some have been disturbed by so-called ‘scandals’ and some have left the Church because of them. This, I feel, is not to understand today's parable. These scandals far from undermining the Christian vision only affirm it. That vision remains a shining ideal. But the Church, which is not to be identified with the vision, is the flawed and fragile bearer of that vision. It has always been so and always will be. The Church is called to proclaim the Kingdom but it has to struggle to realise that Kingdom in itself also.

Today's parable is a call for tolerance, patience, compassion and understanding while not compromising on the vision that comes to us from Jesus.

Week 17 | Monday

Exodus 32:15-24,30-34; Matthew 13:31-35

First Reading (Exodus 32:15-24,30-34)

Before we actually look at today’s reading, we need to see the context in which it takes place.

In today’ reading we skip several chapters in which God gives instructions to Moses on the design and furnishings of a sanctuary which is to accompany the Israelites on their journey, as a sign of God’s continuing presence among them. Central to this sanctuary was the Ark of the Covenant which contained the tablets of the Law which Moses had brought down from Mount Sinai after his dialogue with God.

The instructions cover items like the Ark, the table on which it is placed, the seven-branched lampstand, the altar of holocausts, oil for the lamps, the priestly vestments, priestly vestments, consecration of priests, ordination sacrifices, altar of incense, anointing oil and incense. Much of what is described seems to apply more to the situation that existed in the Temple after it was built at a much later date.

In the meantime, while Moses was getting these instructions from the Lord up on the mountain, the people below began to become impatient. They asked Aaron to provide them with a god as their leader.”As for this man Moses, who brought us to this place, we have no idea what has happened to him.”

So Aaron told the men to get all the jewellery from their wives, sons and daughters and to bring it to him. From these offerings Aaron made a golden calf.

The ‘golden calf’, a term of contempt, was in fact the statue of a young bull, a common symbol of divinity in the ancient east.

It seems that a group in competition with Moses’ group, or a dissident faction of his own group, had or wished to have the figure of a bull to symbolise the presence of God, instead of the Ark of the Covenant. It is not, however, an idol in the strict sense because it represents Yahweh, the Yahweh who brought Israel out of Egypt.

The people then cried out with enthusiasm: “This is your God, O Israel, who brought you out of the land of Egypt!” The bull was not even intended to be an image of Yahweh; like other Eastern parallels, it was regarded as the footstool of the unseen deity, which was also the role played by the Ark of the Covenant.

On the following day, having seen the reaction of the people, Aaron built an altar before the calf and proclaimed, “Tomorrow is a feast of the Lord.” It is clear from this that the golden calf was intended as an image, not of a false god, but of the Lord himself, his strength being symbolised by the strength of a young bull. The Israelites, however, had been strictly forbidden to represent the Lord under any visible form. It was part of the First Commandment, which we saw the other day, cf. Ex 20:4.

Early in the morning, the people offered holocausts and brought peace offerings before the calf and then celebrated with food and drink.

Meanwhile, up on the mountain, God began to tell Moses what was going on. He was not at all pleased.”Let me alone, then,” said the Lord, “that my anger may blaze up against them. Then I will make of you a great nation.” “Let me alone” – the Lord anticipates the remonstration Moses is going to make. And indeed, Moses, immediately pleaded on his people’s behalf.

Moses is regularly presented as the great mediator: at the time of the plagues; on behalf of his sister Miriam; and especially on behalf of the people on their journey through the desert.

He gave two reasons why God should not take vengeance on his people. First, the Egyptians will say that the Hebrews were led out into the desert just so that their God could exterminate them. Secondly, he reminded the Lord of the sacred promises made to Abraham, Isaac and Israel that their descendants would be as numerous as the stars in the sky. So the Lord relented and held back his anger against his people.

It is at this point that our reading today begins.

Moses leaves the presence of God and comes down the mountain bringing with him the two stone tablets on which the Law was written. They were written on both sides and had been engraved by God himself.

When Joshua heard the noise in the Israelite camp, he thought there was a battle going on. Moses replied that they were neither the sounds of victory or defeat but of pure revelry, people having a good time. And, as Moses got near to the camp, he saw the calf and the people dancing around it.

He became so angry at the sight that he threw down the two tablets which were smashed into pieces. He took the golden calf and ground it to powder, scattered it on the water of the stream that flowed down the mountainside and forced the Israelites to drink it.

Moses then asked his brother, Aaron, what the people could have done to him that he should lead them into such a terrible sin. Aaron very blandly passed the responsibility to the people, who were so prone to evil. He told Moses what they asked him to do and how he had asked them to offer their jewellery.”They gave it to me, and I threw it into the fire, and this calf came out.” Just like that!

The next paragraph is omitted from our reading and it is not pleasant reading. When Moses saw the situation he immediately challenged all those who were for the Lord to stand by him. All the Levites rallied round him (Moses himself was from the tribe of Levi). He then gave them instructions to go round the camp and put to the sword even their kinsmen, friends and neighbours. Their kinsmen would have been Levites and hence especially guilty of idolatry. Altogether about 3,000 people were killed in the operation.

Moses tells those who had sided with him that, by their action, they are specially dedicated to the Lord and have brought a blessing on themselves. And, because of their zeal for the true worship of the Lord, the Levites were chosen to be special ministers of ritual service.

Now, back to the last paragraph of our reading.

Moses tells the people that they have committed a very serious sin but that he is going back up to the Lord to ask forgiveness for them.”Perhaps I will be able to make atonement for your sin.” In the presence of the Lord, he acknowledges the seriousness of the people’s sin and begs forgiveness for them.

“If you will not, then strike me out of the book you have written.” This ‘book’ is the list of God’s intimate friends. If it will save his people from destruction, Moses is willing to be excluded from this book. Paul speaks in a similar vein when expressing his grief that so many of his fellow-Jews have not accepted Christ.”I could even wish to be separated from Christ for the sake of my brothers, my kinsmen the Israelites.” And we know how passionately close to Christ Paul was.

In reply, the Lord says he will strike from his book only those who have sinned against him. In the meantime, Moses is to continue leading his people according to the Lord’s instructions. God’s protecting angel will be with them.”When it is time for me to punish, I will punish them for their sins.”

The Chosen People are full of goodwill. They ratify the most solemn covenants with the Lord with sacrifices and holocausts. Yet, they can so easily fall away. It is not for us to blame them. For we, by and large, are no better. We have so many helps in our Christian faith for leading good lives and yet we fail so often.

Let us renew once more our promises to be faithful. It is something, of course, that we can only do with His help.

Gospel (Matthew 13:31-35)

Parables of the Kingdom (cont'd):

Two short parables which reflect both the experience of the early Church and also highlight features of the Kingdom. Considering when they were written, they exude an extraordinary level of trust and confidence in God's power, a trust which was not disappointed although the results were not seen for generations.

The first is the parable of the mustard seed.

The mustard seed is not actually the smallest seed known today, but it was the smallest seed used by Palestinian farmers and gardeners. Nor did it, strictly speaking, produce the largest of trees but, under favourable conditions, it could reach some 10 feet (or 3 metres) in height, big enough to provide shelter for birds.

The early Church, scattered in tiny communities, largely cut off from each other, all over the Mediterranean area must have felt very small, very vulnerable. The idea that in time it would become the central cultural influence all over Europe, Roman and barbarian, must have been beyond the wildest dreams of those early Christians. But that tiny seed did become a large tree providing shelter and comfort to millions and, from the Mediterranean, spread to every corner of the world.

The parable of the yeast in the dough is similar but with a different nuance.

In the Bible, yeast is usually a symbol of that which is evil and corrupt. Jesus warned his disciples about the yeast of the Pharisees (Mk 8:15). Similarly, at the Passover, the Jews eat unleavened bread, that is, bread free from leaven or yeast. In this parable, however, it is presented as a symbol of growth.

A tiny amount of yeast put into a large batch of dough produces striking results. (The 3 measures would produce enough to feed 100 people!) A dough batch, over a matter of hours, can swell to twice its original size as the process of fermentation takes place. The effects of the yeast, quite invisible, reach to every corner. Again, when this was written, that was not yet the case. The Church had made very little impact on its surrounding societies. But, over the years, its influence grew until Christianity became the prevailing faith and cultural influence of the whole of Europe and then continued to spread out to other parts of the world.

This parable points to a very important element in the life and work of the Church. It only exerts its influence when it is totally immersed in the society it wishes to reach and influence. And it can do this while still being only a small part of the whole. While never identifying itself with many of the prevailing ideologies and values of our societies, Christian communities must at the same time never separate themselves from their surroundings. There is a danger that we become inward-looking and spend most of our energies on the already converted. There is a strong evangelising element in this parable which cannot be ignored.

We need to remember that these are primarily parables of the Kingdom and not just of the Church, which is the imperfect sign of the work of the Kingdom going on in our world. And what these parables say applies first of all to the work of building the Kingdom in our world – it is a work which will go on inexorably, because it is based on truth, love and justice, and which slowly penetrates every corner of every society.

We can become aware to the point of depression at the amount of evil that we see around us and yet there is a gradual forward movement at all levels. But, as the previous parable reminds us, the wheat has always to co-exist with the weeds – both inside and outside the Church, both inside and outside the Kingdom.

Today’s reading concludes with a repetition of the statement that Jesus only spoke to the crowds in parables. And Matthew sees this as the fulfilment of a prophetic text from the Old Testament. It is in fact a quotation from Psalm 78:2 - “I will open my mouth in a parable.”

Week 17 | Tuesday

Exodus 33:7-11;35:5-9,28; Matthew 13:35-43

First Reading (Exodus 33:7-11;35:5-9,28)

There are two distinct parts in today’s reading. First, we are told how intimate Moses was with the Lord and, in the second part, there are instructions on how the people are to provide gifts for the needs of worship.

We are told that at some distance away outside the Israelites’ encampment Moses used to pitch a tent, known as the Tent of Meeting. The Tent is mentioned here by anticipation. Its actual construction will be described in later chapters. It is also probable that the Tent in the desert was the shrine of the Ark.

Anyone who wished to consult the Lord could go to this tent. This means that people could go there to ask for a divine response through the agency of Moses who spoke with God in the Tent. In later times, Yahweh would be ‘consulted’ through a man of God or through a prophet or even by using the sacred lots (as one can see Chinese doing today in their temples).

However, when Moses went out to the tent, the people would all stand at the entrance of their own tents and watch Moses until he went inside. As soon as he entered, the column of cloud, representing the Lord’s presence, would come down and stop at the tent’s entrance as the Lord spoke with Moses. And, while he was there, the people would also worship at the entrance to their own tents.

And “the Lord used to speak to Moses face to face, as one man speaks to another”. This is a very remarkable statement because many times the Scripture mentions that no one can look on the face of God and live. Moses had this special and unique privilege, which does not seem shared with any other biblical character. In the Gospel, we have the scene of the Transfiguration where Peter, James and John, have a brief glimpse of Jesus in the glory of his divinity, where Jesus, as it were, removes the veil of his humanity to reveal his full self.

At the end, Moses would return to the camp but his young assistant, Joshua, the son of Nun, would remain in the Tent. Perhaps, he was responsible for the protection of the Tent, as the repository of the Ark.

The second part of the reading consists of a set of instructions from Moses taken from the next chapter (35:5-9). What he says is a command from the Lord. It is part of a large section on the furnishing and building of the sanctuary, a section which is an almost word for word repetition of earlier chapters. There the orders were given; here they are being carried out.

The paragraph in our reading is a list of contributions which the people can make towards the furnishing and adornment of the sanctuary. People are asked to donate as they feel inspired.

The gifts mentioned include precious metals (gold, silver, bronze); dyed thread (violet, purple and scarlet yarn); fabric and animal pelts (fine linen and goat hair); dyed skins (rams’ skins dyed red, and tahash skins); furniture material (acacia wood); oils and spices for sanctuary lights and incense; precious stones for vestments (onyx stones and other gems for mounting on the ephod and on the breast piece).

‘Tahash’ may be the name of a marine animal, such as the dugong or the porpoise. The Greek and Latin translations of the Old Testament understood it as indicating the colour hyacinth. ‘Ephod’ is a technical term for a peculiar piece of the priestly vestments, the exact nature of which is not certain. It seems to have been a sort of apron that hung from the shoulders of the priest by shoulder straps and was tied around his waist by the loose ends of the attached belt.

The link of this second part with the first seems to be that these furnishings would be found inside the Tent where Moses prayed and spoke with the Lord. The Tent was, as mentioned, very likely the place where the Ark of the Covenant was kept.

In our Christian tradition, we have a wonderful record of constructing beautiful places of worship, many of which represent the highest levels of architecture, art and culture – on the basis that only the best is good enough for the worship of God.

At the same time, we need to remember that even the most beautiful church or sanctuary is only as holy as those who use it. It is we who are the real Temple of God.

Gospel (Matthew 13:35-43)

Parables of the Kingdom (cont'd):

Today we have an interpretation of the parable of the wheat and the weeds or darnel. It begins by telling us that Jesus left the crowds and went to “the house”. This is the nameless place where Jesus is at home with his disciples. As we suggested earlier, it is the place for the ‘insiders’, those who are close to Jesus in the sense of following him and accepting his way and is a symbol of where communities of Christians gathered in the early Church. Here Jesus is alone with his own disciples, away from the crowd.

His disciples ask for an explanation of the parable about the wheat and the weeds. Likely enough, what follows is less the actual words of Jesus than a reflection of the early Christian community applying the parable to their own situation. The parable, which basically makes one point, is now turned into an allegory where each part has a symbolic meaning of its own.

The sower is Jesus himself;
the field is the world;
the good seed represents the subjects of the Kingdom;
the darnel, the subjects of the evil one;
the enemy who sowed the weeds, the devil;
the harvest is the end of the world;
the reapers are the angels.

Whereas in the original parable the emphasis seems to be more on the necessary and unavoidable coexistence of good and bad within the Christian community, the emphasis here is more on what will happen at the end: the punishment of the wicked and the reward of the good.

Let us pray that we may be found among the good seed of the Kingdom. We do that by opening ourselves fully to Jesus our King and Lord and following the way he asks us to follow.

Week 17 | Wednesday

Exodus 34:29-35; Matthew 13:44-46

First Reading (Exodus 34:29-35)

Today’s reading comes at the end of an account of the covenant being renewed. The first covenant had fallen through by the Israelites setting up the golden calf as an image of God and worshipping it with sacrifices and holocausts. God had been displeased and Moses was so angry at the sight of the revelling Israelites that he threw the tablets on the ground where they were smashed to pieces.

It was the end of the covenant. But it was not God who had broken it but the people who had reneged on solemn promises to keep the Lord’s commandments.

Moses now asked God who was to be their leader from now on. If they were to continue their journey, they needed the assurance that the Lord was with them.

Moses was then told to cut two new tablets so that the Lord could write on them as he did with the first pair. Then Yahweh appears and speaks consoling words: “Yahweh, Yahweh, God of tenderness and compassion, slow to anger, rich in faithful love and constancy, maintaining his faithful love to thousands, forgiving fault, crime and sin…” They are to know that this is the God they are dealing with. Of course, if they alienate themselves from him, they will be the losers. He will not force himself on them.

God then makes a covenant with the Israelites and gives them a set of instructions for them to follow. It is a summary of commandments already given. Finally, Moses is told to put all this in writing as the terms of the covenant between God and Israel.

And Moses, we are told, stayed up on the mountain with Yahweh for 40 days and 40 nights, eating and drinking nothing, and on the tablets he wrote the words of the covenant – the Ten Words, the Decalogue (Greek, deka logoi, ).

Here our reading takes up the story. It is a story of uncertain origins and records a tradition about the radiance of Moses’ face, expressed by the verb qaran, ‘horn’. The radiance is seen like two horns of light rising from the head of Moses and represented as such in many works of art, including the famous statue by Michelangelo in St Peter’s Basilica in Rome. Our passage makes use of this tradition to describe Moses on his descent from the mountain back to his people.

As Moses came down from the mountain with the two newly inscribed tablets, he was not aware of the radiance of his face after having been speaking face to face with the Lord. When Aaron and the people saw the face of Moses, the radiance of his skin was such that they were afraid to go near him.

Moses told them not to fear and invited them to come close. Aaron and the other leaders approached and then the rest of the people followed. And Moses passed on to them all the instructions that he had received from the Lord on Mount Sinai. Once he had finished speaking, Moses put a veil over his face.

From now on, whenever Moses went into the Lord’s presence, he removed the veil to speak face to face with the Lord. This can refer to the times when Moses went into the Tent of Meeting to talk with God, which we saw in yesterday’s reading.

When he came out again, he would give the Lord’s instructions and the Israelites would see the radiance of his face but then Moses would put the veil back again until the next time he spoke with the Lord.

Paul sees in Moses’ veil a symbol of the failure of many of his people to recognise in Jesus the true Messiah and Saviour. When they read the Old Testament, it is as if a veil is concealing its full meaning from them.”To this very day, when the old covenant is read, the veil remains unlifted; it is only in Christ that it is taken away” (2 Cor 3:14). (It is significant in this context, that Moses only put on the veil after he had passed on the Lord’s message.)

The symbol of the veil also occurs in John’s description of Jesus’ resurrection. When the Beloved Disciple looks into the tomb he notices that the veil which covered the face of Jesus is now wrapped neatly into one place. On seeing this, he believed, that is, he knew that his Lord was with the Father. The veil represents the humanity of Jesus by which his disciples could look on him during his earthly life; now, face to face with the Father in glory, there is no need any more for this veil.

Finally, we might say that the veil that Christ wears now is his community. We are the Body of Christ and it is through his Body that he now communicates with the world. How well are we fulfilling this responsibility, especially on a community level?

Gospel (Matthew 13:44-46)

Parables of the Kingdom (cont'd):

Today we read the 5th and 6th parables which have basically the same message but with some difference in emphasis.

In the first, a man unexpectedly discovers treasure in a field and quickly puts it back again. In ancient times it was common to hide treasure in the ground since there were no banks as we know them. There were, however, “bankers”, people who could handle money, probably closer to what we would call moneylenders. (Remember the parable of the talents where the man who hid his talent was told he should have deposited it with a banker so that it could earn interest. Instead, he did what someone in this parable had done – buried it in a field.)

The finder then goes and quietly buys the field, selling everything he has in order to do so; the treasure is now his.

In the second parable, a jewel merchant comes across a magnificent pearl. Again, he sells all the lesser pearls he already has in order to gain possession of it.

These, Jesus says, are images of the Kingdom. There is a significant difference between them. In the first parable, the man comes on the treasure purely by accident. He was not looking for anything like that. He just came across it while working in someone else’s field. That is the way that Christ can come into some people’s lives. They are living their lives with a greater or lesser degree of happiness and satisfaction and then, out of the blue, they are brought face to face with the Christian message. It can happen in so many ways and has been described in many accounts of conversion. The effect is to turn their whole life around.

In the second case, the man is looking for something. He has a very definite goal in mind – the perfect pearl. Similarly, a person can be looking for real meaning in their life. They may have tried many things already with only partial satisfaction. Then they come across the Gospel of Jesus and they know that here is the answer they have been looking for. Everything else is abandoned as they focus entirely on following the Way of Jesus. They know that this is it.

Once we truly understand what it really means to live under the Lordship of God, once we have a full understanding of the vision of life that Jesus proposes, then everything else pales into insignificance. And, whatever enticements may come our way, we know that there is no other way to go. Jesus is the Way. Jesus is Truth and Jesus is Life. We would not exchange his Way for anything.

Week 17 | Thursday

Exodus 40:16-21,34-38; Matthew 13:47-53

First Reading (Exodus 40:16-21,34-38)

Today we have our final reading from Exodus. Tomorrow we will move on to the Book of Leviticus.

In passages immediately preceding today’s readings, God has been giving instructions on how his sanctuary is to be furnished and adorned. In today’s reading we see these instructions being implemented.”Moses did exactly as Yahweh had ordered him.”

On the first day of the first month in the second year the ‘Dwelling’ was erected by Moses. The ‘Dwelling’ is God’s special point of contact with his people. It is the precursor of the Temple which Solomon will build in Jerusalem at later date. It is a sanctuary on the move; one that accompanies Israel on its long journey to the Promised Land.

First, sockets, frames, crossbars and poles were set in place. The tent covering was put over the Dwelling and another covering for the Tent over that.

The Testimony was then put in the Ark, the shafts were positioned on the Ark and the mercy seat was put on top of the Ark.

The Ark was then brought into the Dwelling and the screening curtain put in place, protecting the Ark of the Testimony from view, as the Lord had decreed.

Although not mentioned here, other furniture was also installed in accordance with the Lord’s instructions. The final piece to be set in place was a basin for ablutions. Before entering the Tent or approaching the altar both hands and feet had to be washed.

Once the work was complete, a cloud covered the Tent of Meeting and the glory of Yahweh filled the Dwelling. Even Moses could not enter the Tent of Meeting, because of the cloud over it, indicating that the glory of God filled the Dwelling. (This seems to contradict what was said earlier but we need to remember that our text is built up from two different traditions.)

From now on, at every stage of the Israelites’ journey, whenever the cloud lifted from the Dwelling, they could resume their march. They never moved as long as the cloud hovered over the Dwelling.

And Yahweh’s cloud stayed over the Dwelling during the day. At night fire could be seen in the cloud, for the whole House of Israel to see, at every stage of their journey. The message was clear: As he had promised, Yahweh was with his people.

Religious buildings are just that – buildings. But, when properly used, they fulfil a very important and symbolic role in the life of any genuine Christian community. But they are never an end in themselves. It is the People who make the real Church.

Gospel (Matthew 13:47-53)

Parables of the Kingdom (cont'd):

We come to the seventh and last of the parables in this discourse. Of course, we need to remind ourselves that Jesus did not speak them one after the other as they are presented here. They are the work of the author's editing, putting matters with a common theme into one place.

Today's Kingdom parable points to the end of time. There will come a time for the end of the Kingdom on earth and then those who belong and those who do not will be clearly distinguished and separated from each other. That is something which cannot and should not be done now as the parable of the weeds indicated.

When will that end be? That, of course, we do not know – fortunately! But one thing we do know is that our own end will come in a relatively short time, even if we live to be 100. And when that happens, it will be clear to God, if not to others, whether we are leaving this world in the Kingdom or outside it, that is, whether we are with God or against him.

How can we make sure we are in the right place? By making sure that I get confession and the ‘last sacraments’ before I die? Don't bet on it! The best guarantee is to enrol in the Kingdom today and every day, to live, with Christ's help, in the way he has shown us. If we do that on a day to day basis the future will take care of itself and there is no need to worry.

The whole discourse is then brought to an end by Jesus asking his disciples if they understand what he has been saying and they say they do.

Then Jesus gives a description of the truly learned disciple. He is a “scribe”, an interpreter of God's Word, who can bring from his storeroom “both the new and the old”, someone who has both the wealth of the Old Testament as well as the vision of the New.”This picture of a ‘scribe who has become a disciple’,” comments the Jerusalem Bible, “sums up the whole ideal of the evangelist and may well be a self-portrait.” The author of this gospel is clearly a Jew who has become a Christian.

As Jesus said earlier, he had not come to destroy the traditions of the ‘old’ Hebrew covenant but to fulfil it with a new covenant. He would equally reject those who abandoned the Hebrew tradition as well as those who rejected the new insights which he brought. This is a process which goes on today in the Christian faith. There is a continuing and creative tension between what has been handed down in the past and the new understandings which arise with changing circumstances. We all have to be both conservative and progressive at the same time!

Week 17 | Friday

Leviticus 23:1,4-11,15-16,27,34-37; Matthew 13:54-58

First Reading (Leviticus 23:1,4-11,15-16,27,34-37)

Today we move on to the third book of the Pentateuch – the Book of Leviticus. It gets its name from the Levites who were responsible for worship and ritual among the Israelites. The content of the book is almost entirely concerned with rules and regulations concerning worship and ritual.

Although we seem to be starting a new ‘book’, it is a continuation of the priestly tradition we saw at the end of Exodus (chaps 25-31; 35-40). And this tradition continues on into the first 10 chapters of the next book, Numbers. The emphasis is on the continuing presence of God among his people. This heightens their sense of sin and also to honour him with sacrifices of worship. These are the means by which a sinful people can be reconciled in their relationship with Yahweh.

We will only be taking two readings from the book, both coming from well into the second half, from chaps. 23 and 25. Today’s reading, which consists of snippets taken from a whole chapter, touches on the observance of certain important feasts which are to be celebrated “at their proper time with a sacred assembly”.

The Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread

The two festivals are linked together, occurring on consecutive days.

The first of these is the Passover of the Lord which falls at the evening twilight on the 14th day of the first month (Nisan).

The 15th day of the same month is the beginning of the feast of the Unleavened Bread. For seven days unleavened bread is to be eaten. (We saw earlier that this feast may be connected with the fact that the Israelites during their flight from Egypt only had unleavened bread with them.) On the first day of this feast there is to be a sacred assembly and no work is to be done. And on each day an offering is to be made to the Lord. Finally, on the seventh and last day, there is again a sacred assembly and no work is to be done.

The First Sheaf

When they arrive in the land which the Lord is giving them, immediately after the harvest, a sheaf of the first fruits of the harvest is to be brought to the priest. He will wave it before the Lord so that it may be acceptable for the offerer. This will be done on the day following the nearest Sabbath.

The Feast of Weeks

On the day after that Sabbath, there shall follow a period of seven full weeks, and on the day after, the 50th day, the offering of cereal made from the new grain will be made to the Lord. Between the feast of Unleavened Bread and the feast of Weeks, the Law of Holiness introduces an offering of the first sheaf (of the barley harvest) at the appropriate place in the agricultural cycle. This is a new formulation of the ancient offering of the first fruits.

From the Greek word for ‘fifty’ (hendeka) we have the name ‘Pentecost’. It was also called ‘the feast of the Seven Weeks’. Pentecost was the thanksgiving feast at the end of the grain harvest, which began after Passover. Later tradition made it a commemoration of the giving of the law at Sinai.

The Day of Atonement

The 10th day of the seventh month is the Day of Atonement, when there is a sacred assembly, penance is to be done and an oblation is made to the Lord. On this day, too, no work is to be done.

We know this feast more commonly as Yom Kippur. Part of the observance was the slaughtering of two goats. One was offered in holocaust and the other was driven out into the desert to die, bearing with it the sins of the whole community. It is from this that we get our term ‘scapegoat’.

The Feast of Booths or Shelters

The 15th day of the seventh month begins the feast of the Booths, which lasts for seven days. The Hebrew name is Sukkoth. On the first day, there is a sacred assembly and no work is to be done. On each of the seven days an oblation will be made to the Lord. On the eighth day there will again be a sacred assembly, an oblation made to the Lord and no work will be done.

This feast was the joyful observance of the grape and fruit harvest. During the seven days of the feast the Israelites camped in booths of branches erected on the flat roofs of their houses or in the streets in commemoration of their wanderings in the desert, where they had dwelt in booths.

These are festivals which are to be observed – during each one there will be a sacred assembly, and when holocausts and cereal offerings, sacrifices and libations, as prescribed for each day, will be offered to the Lord

We find a number of these feasts mentioned in the New Testament and some of them have been incorporated into our Christian faith:

- The feasts of the Passover and the Unleavened Bread are mentioned during the narrative of Holy Week. The Passover was transformed into a new Passover with Christ as the sacrificial Lamb. In every Eucharist, the host is made of unleavened bread.

- The end of the Feast of Weeks is Pentecost which, in our Christian faith, is described by Luke in the Acts of the Apostles as the day on which the Holy Spirit came down on the Jesus’ disciples. (In the gospels, the Spirit is described as being given under different circumstances, e.g. John 20.)

- The Feast of Booths is mentioned in John’s gospel (7:2).

Every community – whether secular or religious – needs its regular celebrations as a reminder and affirmation of its identity and purpose. And our Christian communities are no exception. The important thing is that we remain faithful to the meaning of these celebrations and not reduce them to an occasion for ‘having a good time’. We are often reminded to put Christ back into X-mas, which is in constant danger of being taken over by commercial interests.

Gospel (Matthew 13:54-58)

Immediately following the discourse on the parables of the Kingdom, we see Jesus going to his home town of Nazareth. The New American Bible marks this as the beginning of a new section in Matthew’s gospel which it calls ‘Jesus, the Kingdom and the Church’. It ends with chapter 18, which contains the fourth of the five discourses which are distinctive to Matthew.

As was his right, Jesus spent some time teaching in the synagogue at Nazareth. The townspeople were quite amazed to hear the local carpenter's son speaking as he did.”Where did he get his wisdom and his miraculous powers?” (The New International Version says that the word usually translated ‘carpenter’ could also mean ‘stonemason’.) All his family were well known to the people and they knew he could not have got it from them but they failed to make the next step as to the real origin of what he was saying and doing.

And, in the contrariness of human nature, they were so impressed that they rejected him! He was just too much. A perfect example of familiarity breeding contempt and blinding the eyes to the obvious. And Jesus sadly comments that a prophet can get a hearing everywhere except among his own. Probably all of us have had some experience, directly or indirectly, of this! We Irish, in particular, are well known for our ‘begrudgery’!

It might be helpful for us to see how often and where we ourselves have been guilty of this. How often have we written off what people we know very well, or think we know very well, suggest to us? It is important for us to realise that God can communicate with us through anyone at all and we must never decide in advance who his spokespersons will be.

Finally, we are told that Jesus could not do in Nazareth any of the wonderful things he had done elsewhere “because of their lack of faith”. His hands were tied. Jesus can only help those who are ready to be helped, those who are open to him. How open am I?

Week 17 | Saturday

Leviticus 25:1,8-17; Matthew 14:1-12

First Reading (Leviticus 25:1,8-17)

Today in our second and last reading from the Book of Leviticus we read of the tradition of the Jubilee.

The Jubilee was calculated as happening at the end of seven times seven sabbatical years, in other words, every 50 years. To arrive at this number, the preceding year of jubilee was included in the count, and therefore this was more exactly the 49th year, the seventh sabbatical year. The word ‘jubilee’ is derived from the Hebrew word yobel, which means ‘ram’s horn’ because a horn was blown to announce the beginning of the Jubilee.

The observance of the Jubilee began on the 10th day of the seventh month, the feast of Atonement (Yom Kippur) when a horn or trumpet blast was heard throughout the land.

The main purpose of the Jubilee was to restore social balance to the community. The year was to be made sacred first of all by proclaiming freedom for all citizens. This involved the restoration of both personal and economic freedom.

On the level of personal freedom all Israelite slaves were to be set free. On the level of economic freedom all ancestral land was to be given back to the original owner. For this purpose, everyone was told to return to their own property and everyone to their family land.

The idea was to restore the social balance in a community which was family-based and whose livelihood depended on the ownership of family land. For various reasons, for which family members might or might not be responsible, people might be forced to sell their land in order to survive and, in more severe cases, might even have to sell themselves into slavery. The purpose of the Jubilee was to have their ancestral property and status restored to them.

This arrangement was also an attack on land monopolies which are denounced later on by the prophets. So Isaiah says, “Woe to you who join house to house / who connect field with field / till no room remains, and you are left to dwell / alone in the midst of the land” (Is 5:8) or Micah, “They covet fields and seize them; houses and they take them; / they cheat an owner of his house, a man of his inheritance.” They could be talking about situations in our own contemporary societies.

In selling back or buying back alienated property to the original owner, justice was to be observed and only a fair price charged. The price was to be calculated on the basis of the number of years it had been held – a longer period meant a higher price, because, in effect what was being sold back was not only the land but the harvests which it yielded during that time.

In addition, during the Jubilee, there was to be no sowing, reaping of aftergrowth or picking grapes from untrimmed vines. Only what was directly taken from the field could be eaten and not other produce from it. In other words, fields were to be left fallow during this year. It was easier to give back a fallow field to the original owner than one on which there was a valuable crop which had been planted by the one who had been holding the property.

All this seems a highly admirable arrangement and a model of social justice but it seems that it was only a late attempt to make the sabbatical law, which had similar stipulations, more effective, and it does not seem that this particular law was ever really observed.

The passage concludes by urging all to deal fairly with their neighbour and stand in fear of their God.”I, the Lord, am your God.”

One is reminded of similar ideals for a just society which one reads of in the Acts of the Apostles. We are told that the new Christians would bring forward their property and give it to the community for the shared use of all. No one had any wealth which belonged to them privately. One couple, who only gave part of their property claiming that it was all that they had, was struck dead for their dishonesty.

However, this ideal never really took root in the Church but there is certainly much that could be done in parish communities to see that there is a fairer distribution of members’ assets. The ideal of the Acts that no member was to be in serious need is one which needs to be seriously considered in our own time.

The Church has a great record of speaking about justice and also, in many places, of doing justice but we are a long way from perfection.

“Let there be justice done on earth and let its implementation begin with me.”

Gospel (Matthew 14:1-12)

Our reading is about the death of John the Baptist at the hands of Herod. When Herod the Great died his kingdom was divided among four of his sons. One of them, the Herod of today’s Gospel and also known as Herod Antipas is called a “tetrarch”, meaning that he was the ruler of a fourth part or a quarter of a territory.

Herod Antipas ruled over Galilee and Perea from 4 BC to 39 AD, that is, all during the life of Jesus and beyond. He is the one who wanted to see Jesus and whom Jesus called “that fox”. He is the one to whom Pilate sent Jesus during his trial. His rather painful and loathsome death is described in the Acts. Although only a tetrarch, Matthew calls him ‘king’ because that was his popular title among the Galileans and also in Rome.

It seems that, by all accounts, Herod was a nasty man and, as revealed by today's story, a weak and highly superstitious one. It is striking how many powerful people are made insecure by superstition e.g. businessmen worried by the feng shui (lucky orientation) of their company buildings, anxious to have ‘lucky’ numbers on their cars, and the like.

Herod was hearing extraordinary things about Jesus and he came to the conclusion that Jesus was a re-incarnation of John the Baptist whom he had executed for reasons he knew very well to be totally wrong. Now here was John's spirit come back to taunt him for he had killed God's servant.

This leads to a re-telling by Matthew of the events which led to John's death.

John, who was no respecter of persons, had openly criticised Herod for taking his half-brother Philip's wife, Herodias, as his own partner. This was in clear contravention of the Mosaic Law. Herod's fault was not so much in marrying a close relative but for taking her as his wife when Philip was still living and, at the same time, putting away the wife he already had.

It was already an extraordinarily incestuous family. Herodias was a granddaughter of Herod the Great and therefore a niece of Herod Antipas. First, she married another uncle, Herod Philip, who lived in Rome. He was a half-brother, from a different mother, of Herod Antipas. It was on a visit to Rome that Herod Antipas persuaded Herodias to leave her husband for him. This, of course, was strictly forbidden by the Mosaic law: “You shall not have intercourse with your brother’s wife, for that would be a disgrace to your brother” (Leviticus 18:16).

Herod, doubtless under pressure from Herodias, had wanted to rid himself of the embarrassment John was causing him but was afraid to do anything because, in the eyes of the people, John was a prophet and spoke in the name of God.

Herodias got her chance on the occasion of Herod's birthday. Knowing her new husband's weakness, she got her daughter to dance in his presence. According to the Jewish historian Josephus, the daughter was known as Salome. She later married her granduncle, another Philip and a son of Herod the Great who ruled over the northern territories. He is mentioned by Luke.

Whether the dance was as lascivious as Cecil B. de Mille and others like to suggest, we do not know but Herod was greatly taken by the performance. In the presence of his courtiers and very likely having drunk a little too much he promised the girl he would give her anything she wanted, even half his kingdom. Under the prompting of her mother, she asked for the head of John the Baptist delivered on a dish. Herod was clearly appalled and also afraid but he had made his oath in the presence of a large number of people. He could not go back. John was decapitated and the head delivered as requested. His disciples came and buried the body and then went to tell Jesus.

There are echoes in this story of Jesus' own death. He also died because of the moral weakness of Pilate who gave in to the threats of the Jewish leaders for the sake of his own career. Jesus' death too was the result of blind hatred. And when he died his disciples arranged to have him buried.

Undoubtedly John was a martyr. He died as a witness to truth and justice in the service of God.

Herod, on the other hand, put expediency and his own convenience before truth and justice. He was in an immoral relationship with another woman and he gave in to what he felt would be the criticism and perhaps the derision of others. He had indeed made an oath but it was one that, in the circumstances, he was obliged not to observe.

With whom do I identify with more? John the Baptist, the fearless champion of truth and justice? Or Herod, the vacillator, the one who compromised truth and justice because of pressure of opinion and his own personal interests? I am sure all of us can think of times when we compromised with what we knew was the good thing, the right thing to do and took the line of less resistance.

John is an example to us of integrity. And, like him, we have each one of us been called in our own way to be prophets, to be spokespersons for God's way. It may not always be easy.

Week 18 | Monday

Number 11:4-15; Matthew 14:13-21 (or, Matthew 14:22-36)

NOTE: There is an alternative Gospel for today’s Mass to be used in Year A, when the assigned Gospel has already been read on the preceding Sunday (that is, yesterday).

First Reading (Number 11:4-15)

We move on today to the Book of Numbers and we will just have four readings from it (Monday to Thursday). Its Hebrew title is “In the Wilderness”, which seems a more appropriate description of its contents. ‘Numbers’ simply refers to the beginning of the book where a census of the people is described.

The book, as a whole, is divided into three main sections:

1, Preparing to leave Sinai (1:1-10:10)

2, The journey to Kadesh, where a first attempt to enter Canaan was made (10:11-21:13); and

3, the journey from Kadesh via Transjordan with the intention of approaching Canaan from the east (rather than from the south) (21:14-36:13).

Following the estimation of the book itself, the Israelites spent more than 35 years of their 40 years of ‘wandering’ in Kadesh.

Number immediately on the book of Leviticus as the fourth book of the Pentateuch, (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy). It continues the story of the journey in the desert but also includes various legal prescriptions which either supplement the Sinaitic code or prepare for the time when the people will have settled in Canaan.

The first four chapters consist of a census of all the tribes of Israel (hence the title of the book). There follow various laws and the offerings of the leaders and consecration of the Levites. Chapter 9 consists of a supplement to Exodus about the Passover. In chapter 11 we come to a section describing halts in the wilderness. Today’s reading comes from this section.

We find the Israelites still grumbling about their lot.

The foreigners among them were so anxious to have meat that the Hebrews also complained that they wanted some too.”Would that we had meat for food!” In fact, meat would not have been part of their regular diet when they were slaves in Egypt. Now that they were in a new type of distress, they romanticised the past and minimised its discomforts. And they do not mention meat as food they had in Egypt but only fish and other vegetables and fruits.

Now, they claim they are starving, with nothing to eat but manna. Manna seems to have had quite a pleasant taste but too much of anything can become tiresome. It also seems to have been quite nutritious so the claim about starvation was somewhat exaggerated.

We are given a description of manna and how it was prepared. It was like coriander seed and in Exodus we are told that it was white (lying on the ground it looked like hoar frost) and it tasted like wafers made with honey. It had the appearance of bdellium (Hebrew bedolach), a transparent, amber-coloured gum resin, which is also mentioned in Genesis as being found in the Garden in Eden. Every night (except on the Sabbath) when the dew came, the manna fell also.

To eat it, the people ground it into a kind of flour, cooked it in a pot and made it into loaves which tasted like cakes made with oil.

The target and scapegoat of their troubles was, as usual, Moses, whom they blamed for their present situation. God, too, was not very happy with the ingratitude of the people for whom he had done so much.

Poor Moses! He was caught in the middle, receiving flak from both sides.

In great distress he spoke to God. He had his own complaints to make.”Why do you treat your servant so badly?” He wants to know why he has to carry the burden of blame when it was God’s own idea to bring the people out of Egypt.”Was it I who gave them birth, that you should say to me, ‘Carry them in your bosom, like a nurse with a baby at the breast, to the land that I swore to give their fathers’?”

He felt he could no longer carry the burden alone. Our reading ends with Moses saying he would prefer death than to have to carry on like this.

In fact, God was listening. It is not in today’s reading but God did hear his prayer and spread Moses’ responsibilities among 70 elders.

As for the people’s cry for meat, they would get an abundance of quails every day for a month until they would get so sick at the very sight of meat that they would never want to see it again! They got what they asked for but it was turned into a punishment for their grumbling.

How much of our conversation with colleagues and friends consists of grumbling about all kinds of things? How many people do we see made the scapegoats for what we think has gone wrong? How many of the things we think we cannot do without lose their attractiveness once we have got them in abundance? We are not so different from the Israelites.

Let us today once again count our blessings. Most likely, we will see they far outweigh our grievances.

Gospel 1: Matthew 14:13-21

(see below for alternative Gospel)

The announcement of John the Baptist’s death is followed immediately in Matthew by the feeding of the 5,000 in the desert.

Matthew says that Jesus, on hearing of his cousin’s tragic death, withdrew by boat to a desert place by himself. He clearly wanted time to reflect. He knew that, if things continued as they were, he too could be facing trouble.

However, the crowds knew where he had gone and followed along the shore on foot.”When he disembarked and saw the vast throng, his heart was moved with compassion, and he cured their sick.” His own troubles were set aside as he saw the greater need of the people. We have here, of course, an image of our God, filled with compassion for all of us and anxious to bring us healing and wholeness.

As evening comes down, the disciples suggest that the people be sent to neighbouring villages for food. It is the first mention of the disciples’ presence. In Mark’s version of this story, the disciples had accompanied Jesus in the boat at his invitation, so that they could all have a period of quiet away from the crowds. Jesus’ response is simple and to the point: “You give them food to eat.” They reply: “We have only five loaves of bread and two fish. What good is that?”

This, of course, is a sign of the future. It will be the responsibility of Jesus’ followers to give the people the nourishment they need for their lives. At times, their resources will seem very inadequate but time will show that wonders can be done with very little. Just look at what Mother Teresa achieved with nothing of her own.

The people are then ordered to sit down on the grass. Jesus takes the loaves and fish, looks up to heaven in the direction of his Father, blesses the food, breaks it, gives it to the disciples who in turn distribute it among the people. The whole action clearly prefigures the Eucharist and leads up to it.

It is not explained how it all happened but five thousand men not counting women and children had their fill. Matthew alone notes the presence of women and children. As Jews did not permit women and children to eat together with men in public, they would have been in a place by themselves.

And what was left over filled 12 baskets - a perfect number symbolising abundance and also the number of the apostles.

There are two clear lessons. God takes care of his people. We can read the feeding in two ways. On the one hand, we can simply take it as a miraculous event, pointing to the divine origins of Jesus. On the other hand, there is another possibility with its own meaning. Once the disciples began to share the little food they had with those around, it triggered a similar movement among the crowd, many of whom had actually brought some food with them. When everyone shared, everyone had enough. A picture of the kind of society the Church should stand for.

Some people might say that this is explaining away the miracle but it also makes an important point. The second lesson is that it was the disciples and not Jesus who distributed the bread and fish. And so it must be in our own time. If the followers of Jesus do not share with others what they have received from him, the work of Jesus and the spreading of the Gospel will not happen.

Lastly, there are clear Eucharistic elements in the story. Especially the ritualistic way in which Jesus prayed, blessed, broke and distributed the bread. The breaking of the bread (a name for the Mass) is very important because it indicates sharing and not just eating. The Eucharist is the celebration of a sharing community. If sharing of what we have in real life is not taking place, then the Eucharist becomes a ritualistic sham, a whited sepulchre full of dead people’s bones.

Alternative Gospel: Matthew 14:22-36

(Read during Year A of the Sunday cycle, when the above Gospel is read on the previous Sunday, namely, yesterday).

As soon as the five thousand had been filled with the food that Jesus gave them, Jesus packs his disciples off in the boat to the other side of the lake. He sends the crowds away and then retreats to the mountain to pray all by himself.

We know from John’s account that the people wanted to make him a king. If Jesus wanted to take control of the crowd this was the moment; they were ready to follow enthusiastically. Jesus was indeed their king but not the kind they were expecting. He would draw the crowds to him in a very different way, hanging in shame on a cross.

It looks too as if he did not want his disciples to get any wrong ideas either. They must have been elated at their role in the extraordinary event of feeding more than 5,000 people. So, perhaps with a lot of grumbling, they are sent off even before the excited crowds have dispersed.

As they make their way across the lake in this dark mood, things get even worse. They run into a big storm and their boat is being tossed about like a cork. Then, out of the darkness, between 3 and 6 in the morning hours, they see Jesus approaching them across the water. Far from being delighted, they are terrified out of their wits. Superstitious men that they are, they think it is a ghost. Ghosts were very much a part of their world.

Words of encouragement come across the water: “Courage! It is I [Greek, ego eimi] = I AM]. Do not be afraid.” Jesus gives himself the very name of Yahweh; this is all the reassurance they need. Their God is with them.

Only in Matthew’s account of this story do we have Peter’s reaction.”Lord, if it really is you, tell me to come to you across the water.”

“Come!” replies Jesus.

Peter gets out of the boat and goes towards Jesus. It is an act of love and faith/trust. But not quite enough. The power of the wind and waves gets stronger than his desire to be with Jesus. He begins to sink.”Lord, save me!” Jesus lifts him up, “How little faith/trust you have!”

As soon as Jesus and Peter get into the boat, there is a complete calm.

The rest of the disciples are overwhelmed: “Truly, you are the Son of God.”

We have here behind this story an image of the early Church, of which the boat and the disciples are a symbol. The surrounding water is the world and the wind and waves, the forces which threaten the tiny community. Jesus seems to be far away but he is not and he appears in the midst of the storm. Once he steps inside the boat, there is calm, not only because the surrounding storm has stopped but also because of the peace which the awareness of Jesus’ presence gives.

There is an added element in this story in that Peter, the leader of the community, comes hand in hand into the boat with Jesus. In time, the authority of Jesus will be passed over to him.

There is also, of course, in the calming of the storm an indication of Jesus’ real identity, expressed in the awe-filled words of the disciples, “Truly, you are the Son of God”, echoing Jesus’ own statement of “I AM”.

There is a brief epilogue at the end of our passage. The boat reaches the area of Gennesaret. The name refers either to the narrow plain, about four miles long and less than two miles wide on the north-west shore of the Sea of Galilee, north of Magdala, or to a town in the plain. Significantly for the work that Jesus was about to do, the plain was considered a garden land, fertile and well watered.

As soon as Jesus reaches the shore the crowds again gather in huge numbers especially to have their sick cured. So great was their faith that they asked only to touch the fringe of his garment. All those who did so (in faith) were healed.

Jesus had sent away the crowds earlier probably because of the late hour but also perhaps because of the mood of the crowd which was taking on political overtones not wanted by Jesus. But now they are back to seek from him what he came to give them: healing and wholeness.

Week 18 | Tuesday

Numbers 12:1-13; Matthew 14:22-36

NOTE: Again, an alternative Gospel for today is used in Year A of the Sunday cycle, when the Gospel of today was read on Monday (yesterday).

First Reading (Numbers 12:1-13)

Not only do the people complain but Aaron and Miriam, the brother and sister of Moses, are also grumbling against their brother.

Ostensibly their complaint was that Moses had married a Cushite woman. This seems to be Zipporah, the daughter of Jethro and a Midianite, whom Moses married when he was in hiding for killing a man prior to his becoming leader of his people (cf. Exod 2:21). There is an element of contempt in the expression.

However, it seems their real grievance was that God spoke not only through Moses but also through them. The prophet Micah speaks of Moses, Aaron and Miriam as God’s gracious provision for Israel (Mic 6:4). Yet they were not given the treatment they felt they deserved, the kind of treatment that he was getting from God. Miriam appears as the chief complainer and Aaron simply goes along with her, so she alone will be punished.

In spite of the favours God showered on him, Moses himself is described as being the meekest man on earth (though he could, when need be, speak in very harsh language to wrongdoers). The complaint thrown against him could not be attributed to any arrogance on his part.

So God (how human he appears in all these accounts!) overhears their murmurings and summons all three to the Tent of Meeting. He comes down in a pillar of cloud, stands at the entrance to the Tent and calls Aaron and Miriam to come forward.

God makes his meaning very clear to them. He makes a distinction between other prophets and Moses. (Miriam herself was a prophetess.) He communicates with prophets through visions and dreams but only Moses is at home in God’s house and God speaks to him face to face, plainly and not in riddles and Moses sees the very form of Yahweh.

With other prophets and seers, God’s revelation did not always come to them with complete clarity. A prophet might not fully understand the oracles he uttered and they might seem to be riddles and mysteries. But, in Moses’ case, God spoke with special clarity - like two people speaking face to face. Clearly this was a privilege granted to no other human being.

By way of exception, some others would be given a share in the divine spirit and God would raise up prophets after Moses’ death, but Moses will remain the greatest of them all, until John the Baptist comes, the fore-runner of the new covenant.

How then could Aaron and Miriam have the temerity to speak against someone who had such a close relationship with him? So angry was God with the way Miriam and Aaron criticised God’s special friend that, as soon as he left and the cloud disappeared, Miriam found herself a leper, her whole body as white as snow. Actually, it was not strictly speaking leprosy (Hansen’s disease) but an affliction known as “white leprosy” that is not regarded as serious or of long duration. However, it had the effect of ostracising her from the community for some time.

Aaron then begged that the sin they had foolishly committed be not held against them. He begged that his sister not be left to look like a still-born baby “with its flesh half consumed”.

Moses, too, begs God to bring healing to his sister. On this note the reading ends.

Later, Aaron will pray to God on behalf of his sister. She will be cured but not before she spends seven days outside the camp in quarantine and isolation until her skin returns to normal.

Perhaps today we could look into our own hearts and see if there are any traces of jealousy there. What or who are we jealous about and why? And how do we relate with the people towards whom we feel jealous or envious?

Can we learn to thank God for the gifts we see in other people?

Gospel

Gospel 1: Matthew 14:22-36 (this is the same as the alternative Gospel for yesterday)

As soon as the people had been filled with the food that Jesus gave them, Jesus packs his disciples off in the boat to the other side of the lake. He sends the crowds away and then retreats to the mountain to pray all by himself.

We know from John’s account that the people wanted to make him a king. If Jesus wanted to take control of the crowd this was the moment; they were ready to follow enthusiastically. Jesus was indeed their king but not the kind they were expecting. He would draw the crowds to him in a very different way, hanging in shame on a cross.

It looks too as if he did not want his disciples to get any wrong ideas either. They must have been elated at their role in the extraordinary event of feeding more than 5,000 people. So, perhaps with a lot of grumbling, they are sent off even before the excited crowds have dispersed.

As they make their way across the lake in this dark mood, things get even worse. They run into a big storm and their boat is being tossed about like a cork. Then, out of the darkness, between 3 and 6 in the morning hours, they see Jesus approaching them across the water. Far from being delighted, they are terrified out of their wits. Superstitious men that they are, they think it is a ghost. Ghosts were very much a part of their world.

Words of encouragement come across the water: “Courage! It is I [Greek, ego eimi] = I AM]. Do not be afraid.” Jesus gives himself the very name of Yahweh; this is all the reassurance they need. Their God is with them.

Only in Matthew’s account of this story do we have Peter’s reaction.”Lord, if it really is you, tell me to come to you across the water.”

“Come!”

Peter gets out of the boat and goes towards Jesus. It is an act of love and faith/trust. But not quite enough. The power of the wind and waves gets stronger than his desire to be with Jesus. He begins to sink.”Lord, save me!” Jesus lifts him up, “How little faith/trust you have!”

As soon as Jesus and Peter get into the boat, there is a complete calm.

The rest of the disciples are overwhelmed: “Truly, you are the Son of God.”

We have here behind this story an image of the early Church, of which the boat and the disciples are a symbol. The surrounding water is the world and the wind and waves, the forces which threaten the tiny community. Jesus seems to be far away but he is not and he appears in the midst of the storm. Once he steps inside the boat, there is calm, not only because the surrounding storm has stopped but also because of the peace which the awareness of Jesus’ presence gives.

There is an added element in this story in that Peter, the leader of the community, comes hand in hand into the boat with Jesus. In time, the authority of Jesus will be passed over to him.

There is also, of course, in the calming of the storm an indication of Jesus’ real identity, expressed in the awe-filled words of the disciples, “Truly, you are the Son of God”, echoing Jesus’ own statement of “I AM”.

There is a brief epilogue at the end of our passage. The boat reaches the area of Gennesaret. The name refers either to the narrow plain, about four miles long and less than two miles wide on the north-west shore of the Sea of Galilee, north of Magdala, or to a town in the plain. Significantly for the work that Jesus was about to do, the plain was considered a garden land, fertile and well watered.

As soon as Jesus reaches the shore the crowds again gather in huge numbers especially to have their sick cured. So great was their faith that they asked only to touch the fringe of his garment. All those who did so (in faith) were healed.

Jesus had sent away the crowds earlier probably because of the late hour but also perhaps because of the mood of the crowd which was taking on political overtones not wanted by Jesus.

But now they are back to seek from him what he came to give them: healing and wholeness.

Gospel 2: Matthew 15:1-2,10-14

(To be used if Gospel 1 was read yesterday.)

We find Jesus and his disciples in dispute with the scribes and Pharisees. The scribes were interpreters of the Law and so normally took the stricter meaning. The Pharisees also prided themselves on their exact interpretation of every detail of the Law.

They approach Jesus and ask him why his disciples do not observe the traditions of the elders and do not wash their hands before they ate. One can presume that the washing of hands before eating had originally been a hygienic practice as it is for us. Someone coming in from a day working on a farm or in a workshop would need to clean their hands before eating. But, perhaps to make sure that what was done through common sense should always be done, it had been raised to the level of a religious ritual. And the washing now was not just to remove dirt from the hands but to purify them in case they had come in contact with anything that was ‘unclean’. That could even mean having shaken hands with a Gentile or some other ‘unclean’ person or to have touched a kind of food that was not allowed to be eaten.

In today’s reading we omit the reply that Jesus gives where he accuses his questioners of themselves breaking God’s law by their observance of what they call ‘tradition’. Instead, we go on to a passage where Jesus speaks to the crowds about what really makes for cleanliness. A person, he said, is made unclean not by what goes into their mouths but by what comes out of it. This is an anticipation of the Christian position, clarified later in the Acts of the Apostles, where no food is to be seen as ritually unclean (although, of course, it may be unclean for other reasons). Real un-cleanliness comes from inside, from the heart and mind.

Later, the disciples approach Jesus and tell him that the Pharisees are highly offended by what Jesus has said. He gives them an enigmatic answer: “Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be uprooted.” In other words, the validity of any person’s opinion stems from its being in harmony with God’s thoughts. It is a choice between the ideas of the Pharisees and the words of Jesus. Which one represents the Word of God? Whose thoughts have been planted by God?

Jesus goes on to say that the Pharisees are blind guides and those they lead are blind. They do not know where they are going and they will both fall into the pit. This blindness of the Pharisees is referred to more than once in the Gospel. Their blindness is not due to ignorance or lack of intelligence but to their refusal to be open-minded and consider other alternatives to the truth they claim.

We sometimes meet Christians who behave like this too. They go around giving the impression that they and only they have the correct interpretation of the Christian faith. They are often rigid and intolerant and refuse to consider alternative points of view. It gives them a kind of security, a dogmatic security (“We have the Truth”) but it is a false security and it very often lacks the most important virtue of all, Christian charity and love.”Where there is love, there is God.” Where love is absent. . .

Week 18 | Wednesday

Numbers 13:1-2,25-14:1,26-29,34-35; Matthew 15:21-28

Numbers 13:1-2,25-14:1,26-29,34-35

At last the end of the long desert journey is in sight - though not in the way many of the people expect.

Yahweh tells Moses to send scouts, a leading man from each of the 12 tribes, to explore the land of Canaan, which the Lord has promised to give them as their own. Forty days later they returned to Moses, Aaron and the whole Israelite community waiting in the desert of Paran at Kadesh. This is not a town but indicates a region and the site of the principal oasis to the north of Sinai, 90 km southwest of Beersheba. The name is preserved today by the spring of Ain Qadeis. From time immemorial, this oasis has been a stop-off point for caravans in the desert.

The scouts make a report on what they found and brought back with them samples of the country’s produce. Their report was very upbeat. The country did indeed flow with milk and honey. Less promising was their discovery that its inhabitants were powerful and lived in large and fortified towns. Taking it over would not be easy.

Among the people they encountered were the Anakim, an aboriginal race occupying southern Palestine. Also in the region were the Amalekites who occupied the Negeb, the Hittites, Jebusites and Amorites who were in the highlands and, lastly, the Canaanites along the sea shore and the banks of the Jordan.

Caleb, one of the scouts, who was from the tribe of Judah, urged that they should march in immediately and the take the land. He was confident it could be overcome. Others in the scouting party, however, were much more cautious.”We cannot attack these people; they are stronger than we are.”

As if to back up their argument, they gave a far less attractive picture of what they saw. It is a country, they said, which devours its inhabitants. The people they saw were of huge size; they even saw giants. (Anakim is explained as ‘descended from giants’.) Either because of their tall stature or because of the massive stone structures left by them the Israelites regarded them as giants. In comparison with these people, the scouts felt like grasshoppers.

The people were influenced by this more negative report. They cried out in dismay and wept the whole night. The frightening words of the faithless scouts led to mourning by the entire community and to their great rebellion against the Lord. They forgot all the wonders the Lord had done for them, they despised his mercy and spurned his might. In their ingratitude they preferred death.

What follows in the Bible text is not included in our reading but explains the latter part of the reading.

Faced with this terrible report, the people become very angry and vented their anger on Moses and Aaron. Once again they were saying they would have been much better off staying behind as slaves in Egypt or even to have died in the desert rather than be slaughtered together with their wives and children in this country. They even suggested appointing a leader to bring them back to Egypt.

Faced with this rebellion, Moses and Aaron fell prostrate on the ground but two of the scouts, Joshua (whose name had been changed from Hoshea) and Caleb repeated the positive picture that had first been given about the land being very attractive. If God wanted them to live there, it would happen. There was no need to rebel against Yahweh or to be afraid of the people. It is not they who would gobble up the Israelites but the other way round. However, the people were not convinced and wanted to stone the two leaders.

Now, it is God, appearing in the cloud at the Tent of Meeting, who expresses his anger at the ingratitude of the people. He threatens to strike them with a pestilence and disown them - they will no longer be his people.

Once again, Moses pleads on their behalf. To destroy the people now would only make God a laughing stock among the nations.”Yahweh was not able to bring this people into this country, so he slaughtered them in the desert.” On the contrary, says Moses, this is precisely the time for Yahweh to show his power and to remember his earlier words that he was “slow to anger and rich in faithful love, forgiving faults and transgression”, yet dealing justly with those who had done wrong.”Please forgive this people’s guilt, as you have done from Egypt until now.”

God finally promises to forgive but those people who over the years have put the Lord to the test ten times already and not obeyed his voice will not enter the Promised Land. They will die in the desert, as they had wished. Their lack of faith and of confidence in God is cited in 1 Cor 10:10 and Heb 3:12-18, as a warning for Christians. In Hebrews we read:

Take care, my brothers, lest any of you have an evil and unfaithful spirit and fall away from the living God. . . Who were those who revolted when they heard the voice [of God]? Was it not all whom Moses led out from Egypt? With whom was God angry for 40 years? Was it not those who had sinned, whose corpses fell in the desert? To whom but to the disobedient did he swear that they would not enter his rest? We see, moreover, that it was their unbelief that kept them from entering” (Heb 3:12-19).

There is clearly meant to be a message there for Christians.

Caleb, the scout from the tribe of Judah, on the other hand, who is “of another spirit and has obeyed me completely” will take possession of the land and his descendants will own it. (Later, the two kingdoms will be called ‘Israel’ and ‘Judah’.)

Yahweh then speaks to Moses and Aaron. He can no longer endure the complaints of this perverse community. Sentence is then given: All those who are 20 years or over and who muttered against the Lord will die in the desert. Their children will be nomads in the desert for 40 years on the basis that the sins of the fathers go to the third and fourth generation.”This is how I swear to treat this entire perverse community united against me. In this desert, to the last man, they shall die.”

The 40 days of the travels of the scouts becomes the numerical pattern for their suffering: one year for one day - for 40 years they will recount their misjudgement, and for 40 years the people, who are now 20 years old or more, will be dying off. In the end only a later generation, under 20 years of age at the time of this final rebellion, will be able to enter the Promised Land. Significantly, Israel’s refusal to carry out the Lord’s commission to conquer his land is the climactic act of rebellion for which God condemns Israel to die in the desert. Divine promises will be kept but not for those to whom they were originally made.

Our God is a God of compassion and mercy but there are limits and justice has to be done. These people have brought their misfortunes on themselves. Sin, because it is the choice of evil over good, of lies over truth, of hatred over love, or revenge over forgiveness, contains its own punishment. It is never the work of God.

Gospel (Matthew 15:21-28)

Jesus is seen on one of his few visits outside Jewish territory. The cities of Tyre and Sidon are on the Mediterranean coast in what is today Lebanon.

While he is there he is approached by a Canaanite (that is, a non-Jewish) woman whose child is “troubled by a demon”. Whether it was an actual possession or some natural physical or mental ailment does not really matter. Already the woman’s faith and trust in Jesus is indicated by the way she addresses him, “Lord, Son of David!” coupled with her plea for his compassion.

At first, Jesus ignores her completely. The disciples intervene and ask Jesus to give her what she wants because she is making such a nuisance of herself. Jesus replies that his mission is only to the “house of Israel”, to which this woman clearly does not belong.

In the meantime the woman continues her pleading, “Help me, Lord!” She is following, in fact, advice that the Gospel gives - keep on asking. Jesus replies in words that sound very harsh, if not racist: “It is not right to take the children’s food and give it to the dogs.”

‘Dogs’, together with ‘swine’, was a common colloquial expression among Jews for Gentiles (cf. Matt 7:6: “Do not give what is holy to dogs or cast your pearls before swine.”) The dog was regarded as an unclean and promiscuous animal. Because it was such a common expression, it is probably not as harsh as it sounds to us and, if spoken with a measure of humour (implied by Jesus’ use of the diminutive, ‘doggies’), would not have given offence at all. As they say, everything is in the tone of voice. (Not unlike when my Chinese friends call me a gwai-lo [’devil fellow’] - a common term for non-Chinese.) Jesus was not a racist; that is clear from other situations where he dealt with non-Jews and with other commonly despised groups.

For her part, the woman certainly is not in the least fazed. She comes right back: “Even the dogs eat the leavings that fall from their masters’ tables.” That was enough for Jesus. She had proved her genuineness.”Woman, you have great faith. Your wish will come to pass.” Her daughter was cured on the spot.

It is a hint of what is to come. Membership of God’s people will be measured not by birth or circumcision but by a living faith in Jesus as Lord.

A story like this is an occasion for us to look at our own attitudes to people of other races, ethnic groups and nationalities not to mention the socially disadvantaged or physically or mentally disabled - in other words, any people who are ‘different’. How inclusive are we in word and action? And does our parish community go out of its way to provide a welcome for the ‘outsider’? These are very real questions in societies which are becoming more and more inter-cultural.

Week 18 | Thursday

Numbers 20:1-3; Matthew 16:13-23

First Reading (Numbers 20:1-3)

Yesterday’s reading is followed in Numbers by a long section of laws governing sacrifices, powers of priests and Levites (chaps 15-19 incl).

The main theme of the section we are entering is the steady advance of God’s chosen people despite all opposition on their part. Today is the final passage we will be taking from the book and is an account of another sad confrontation between Yahweh and his people.

The Israelites are very near the end of their long journey.

We are told that the whole community of the Israelites arrived at the desert of Zin on the first month of the year and that the people settled in Kadesh. The desert of Zin was a barren region with a few good oases, lying southwest of the Dead Sea.

It is the first month but we are not told in which year. However, based on earlier information, we are led to the conclusion that this passage begins in the 40th year after the Exodus. Those people over 20 years of age, whom the Lord said would not enter the Promised Land because of their disobedience at Kadesh (cf. yesterday’s reading), have now all died.

The larger part of the desert wandering is left without record. The people may have gone through a cycle of roving travels, seeking water sources and the sparse vegetation, supported primarily by manna. But their circular wanderings would bring them back to the central camp at Kadesh, the scene of their great rebellion when, on the very borders of the Promised Land, they refused to enter it (yesterday’s reading). They have now come full circle; once again, the land of promise lies before them.

Here Miriam, the sister of Moses and Aaron, died and was buried.

When they got back to Kadesh, there was no water for the community and, as happened so often before, the people held a council, putting the blame on Moses and Aaron for their situation.

Forty years earlier, the Lord had instructed Moses to take the staff he had used to strike the Nile (turning it to blood - one of the Ten Plagues, Exod 7:17) and to strike the rock at Horeb [Sinai] to initiate a flow of water (Ex 17:1-7). Now, 40 years later, at the place of Israel’s worst acts of rebellion, the scene was recurring. The descendants of the rebellious nation now desire to die along with their parents; they have learnt nothing from their 40 years of wandering.

They ask: Why did Moses brings Yahweh’s own people and their flocks into a desert place to die? Why were they taken out of Egypt in the first place? Where they are now it is impossible to sow crops, there is no fruit, no vines - and not even water to drink.

Leaving the assembly, Moses and Aaron went to the Tent of Meeting which was at some distance from the encampment. As they fell on their faces, the glory of the Lord appeared to them. He was aware of their problem and why they had come looking for him. He immediately gave them instructions:

Moses, with Aaron, was told to take the staff and gather the people together. Then, in full view of the people, he was to speak to the rock and order it to release its water.

Although Moses was told to take his staff, through which God had performed wonders in Egypt and in the desert all these years, this time he was told just to speak to the rock and it would pour out its water for the people.

Moses and Aaron would then release the water from the rock and provide drink for the whole community and its livestock.

Moses then took the staff from before Yahweh, as instructed, and called the assembly together in front of the rock.

He then said to the gathered people: “Listen now, you rebels. Shall we make water gush from this rock for you?” His calling them ‘rebels’ is an indication of years of accumulated anger, exasperation and frustration of 40 years with this rebellious people.

Moses then raised his hand and struck the rock twice with the staff. In his rage Moses disobeyed the Lord’s instruction only to speak to the rock.

Immediately, water gushed out in abundance and people and animals alike were able to drink.

However, Moses’ rash action brought a stern rebuke from the Lord. Yahweh said to Moses: “Because you were not faithful to me in showing forth my holiness before the Israelites, you shall not lead this community into the land I will give them.” ‘In showing forth my holiness’ is an allusion to the name Kadesh, which means ‘sanctified, sacred’. God’s holiness was offended by Moses’ rash action, for he had not shown proper deference to God’s presence. The sin of Moses and Aaron seems to consist in doubting God’s mercy toward the ever-rebelling people.

And Moses is punished by not being allowed to bring the people, whom he had faithfully led for 40 years, into the Promised Land. At first sight, it seems a very severe punishment for something relatively minor.

In fact, the full nature of Moses’ sin is not altogether clear. Perhaps something less creditable to Moses has been suppressed. It is possible that the punishment really belongs to the refusal to enter Canaan (described in yesterday’s reading) which Moses may have endorsed because it was deemed too dangerous. It would have been a serious lack of trust in God’s promise to protect his people, more serious than his striking the rock twice at Meribah.

Whatever the explanation, the result is sure: neither Aaron nor Moses would enter the Promised Land. Of their contemporaries only Joshua and Caleb would survive to enter the land.

The author closes with a final comment. These were the Waters of Meribah, where the Israelites laid the blame on Yahweh and where, by their means, he asserted his holiness. Meribah means ‘contention’.

And whatever the right interpretation, the words of today’s Responsorial Psalm provide an excellent lesson for us:

If today you hear his voice, harden not your hearts. . .

harden not your hearts as at Meribah,

as on that the day of Massah in the desert,

where your fathers tempted me;

they tested me though they had seen my works.

Like the Israelites, it is so easy for us to forget the good things God has done for us just because we have run into some difficulties.

Once again, let us count our blessings.

Gospel (Matthew 16:13-23)

We now reach a high point in Matthew’s narrative. More than any of the other gospels, his is a Gospel of the Church. (Mark emphasises discipleship; Luke the communication of God’s love and compassion; John unity with God through Jesus.)

We find Jesus and his disciples in the district of Caesarea Philippi. This is not the fine city of Caesarea built by Herod the Great on the shore of the Mediterranean. It was a town, rebuilt by Herod’s son Philip, who called it after the emperor Tiberius Caesar and himself. It lay just to the north of the Sea of Galilee and near the slopes of Mount Hermon. It had originally been called Paneas, after the Greek god Pan and is known today as Banias.

The area was predominantly pagan, dominated by Rome. In a sense, therefore, it was both an unexpected yet fitting place for Jesus’ identity to be proclaimed. He was, after all, not just for his own people but for the whole world.

Jesus begins by asking his disciples who people think he really is. They respond with some of the speculations that were going round: he was John the Baptist resurrected from the dead (Herod’s view, for instance) or Elijah (whose return was expected to herald the imminent coming of the Messiah) or Jeremiah or some other of the great prophets.

The Jews at this time expected a revival of the prophetic spirit which had been extinct since Malachi. John was regarded by many of the people as a prophet, although he denied that he was the expected prophet, often thought to be Elijah returned. The early Christians saw Jesus as a prophet but with the appearance of prophecy as a charism in their communities the term was dropped in his case.

Interestingly, the people did not seem to think that Jesus himself was on a par with these ‘greats’ of their history. We do tend to undervalue the leaders of our own time when compared with those of the past.

“And you,” Jesus goes on, “who do you say I am?” It was a moment of truth, a very special moment in his disciples’ relationship with their Master. Simon speaks up: “You are the Messiah, the Christ, the Son of the living God.” It is a huge step forward for Peter and his companions. As we shall see, it is not yet a total recognition of his identity or mission. But Jesus is no mere rabbi, no mere prophet, but the long-awaited Messiah and Saviour King who would deliver Israel. It is an exciting moment in their relationship with him. And it is only in Matthew that Peter calls him “Son of God”.

The focus now shifts immediately to Simon. He is praised for his insight but Jesus makes clear that it comes from divine inspiration and is not a mere deduction. A ‘mystery’, in the Scripture sense, is being uncovered.

And now comes the great promise. Simon from now on is to be called ‘Peter’, a play on the word for ‘rock’ (kepha in Aramaic, petra/petros in Greek), for he will become the rock on which the “church” will be built, a rock which will stand firm against all attacks on it. A promise which must have sounded very daring at the time it was written but which 2,000 years have again and again vindicated. ‘Peter’ in either its Aramaic or Hebrew was not a previously known personal name.

The term ‘church’ only appears twice in Matthew and not at all in the other three gospels. The Hebrew word qahal which in Greek is rendered as ekklesia ( means ‘an assembly called together’. It was used often in the Old Testament to indicate the community of the Chosen People.

“By using this term ekklesia side by side with ‘Kingdom of Heaven’, Jesus shows that this eschatological community (community of the ‘end-times’) is to have its beginnings here on earth in the form of an organised society whose leader he now appoints.” (Jerusalem Bible, loc. cit.)

And Simon is given power and authority, the “keys of the Kingdom”, all that he will need to make the Kingdom a reality. His authority and that of the ‘church’ is the authority of Jesus himself. Whatever Peter and the church formally decide is immediately ratified by God; they are his appointed agents.

Lastly, they are strictly ordered not to tell anyone else that Jesus is the Messiah. The people are not ready to hear it; they have their own expectations which are very different from the Messiah that Jesus is going to be. The disciples themselves have a totally wrong idea as becomes immediately clear in what follows.

From the moment that they recognise Jesus as Messiah, he begins to prepare them for what is going to happen.”[The Son of Man] must go to Jerusalem to suffer greatly at the hands of the elders, the chief priests, and the scribes, and to be put to death, and raised up on the third day.” This is the first of three ominous predictions.

After the euphoria of knowing their Master was the Messiah, all their dreams and hopes are shattered by these terrible revelations. It is hard for us to imagine the impact these words must have had. Peter, who had just covered himself in glory and been appointed leader, almost patronisingly takes Jesus aside, “God forbid that any such thing ever happen to you!”

For him and the others this was an unthinkable scenario for the Messiah they were all waiting for. How much more shocked Peter must have been at Jesus’ reaction.”Get out of my sight, you Satan! You are trying to make me trip and fall. You are not judging by God’s standards but by man’s.” The man who was just now called a Rock is accused of being Satan’s advocate! Instead of being a rock of stability, he is seen as a stumbling block in the way of Jesus.

Peter is seen as doing the very work of the devil in trying to divert Jesus from the way he was called to go, the way in which God’s love would be revealed to us, the way in which we would be liberated for the life of the Kingdom.

It will take time before Peter and the others both understand and accept the idea of a suffering and dying Messiah. It will not happen until after the resurrection. Before that the Rock will be guilty of a shameful betrayal of the Man who put such trust in him.

We too can ask ourselves to what extent we accept Jesus the rejected, suffering, dying and rising Messiah.

Week 18 | Friday

Deuteronomy 4:32-40; Matthew 16:24-28

First Reading (Deuteronomy 4:32-40)

Today we begin the first of five readings from the book of Deuteronomy, the last of the five books of the Pentateuch.

The book has a distinct plan of its own. It is a code of civil and religious laws (chs 12-26:15), with a long discourse of Moses for its framework (chs 5-11 and ch 26:16-ch 28). The whole is preceded by a first Mosaic discourse (chs 1-4) and followed by a third, chs 29-30. This is followed in its turn by sections dealing with the last days of Moses: Joshua’s mission, the long canticle of Moses, the blessings he pronounces, his death (chs 31-34). The code of Deuteronomy is in part a resumption of the laws proclaimed in the desert. Its discourses commemorate the great events of the Exodus, of Sinai and of the early stages of the Conquest; they explain the religious meaning of these events and appeal for fidelity to the Law who importance they emphasise. (Jerusalem Bible)

The book was written long after Moses’ time and consists largely of an updating of Moses’ original teaching.

Today’s reading is taken from the first of the three long discourses attributed to Moses which form the greater part of the whole book. It speaks of the unique privilege the Israelites have had.

He asks the Israelites if any other people have had such extraordinary experiences of their God as they have. Was there ever a word so majestic spoken from one end of the heavens to the other?

Did ever a people hear the voice of the living God, speaking from the heart of the fire, as they have heard it and remained alive?

Did it ever happen before that any god took one nation out of another one through ordeals, signs, wonders and war with a mighty hand and outstretched arm, and fearsome terrors? We think here of the demonstrations of God’s power as in the ten great plagues of Egypt. All of this God did for the Israelites before their very eyes.

Yahweh’s purpose was to show that he was the true God and there is no other. We have here something new: an explicit assertion of the non-existence of other gods. The Decalogue simply forbade the worship of foreign gods. The God of the Israelites was the God of Abraham, of Isaac of Jacob and, at an earlier period, distinguished from the gods of other peoples. These had long been regarded as inferior to Yahweh, impotent and contemptible, but their existence was not denied. But now a new level in understanding has been reached: these gods simply do not exist.

In order to teach his people, Yahweh made them hear his voice from heaven; on earth they were allowed to see his great fire; from the heart of the fire they heard his words. They saw his presence among them in the cloud and the fire.

Because of his great love for their ancestors, Yahweh chose their descendants and brought them out of Egypt. They saw the wonders of that liberation.

He went further and showed his might and power by dispossessing nations larger and stronger than they were. A reference to the people they had to overcome in taking possession of Canaan as the Promised Land.”He made way for you and gave you their country as your inheritance - to this very day.”

So the people should reflect on this: Yahweh is the true God, in the heavens above and on the earth beneath, and there is no other. A re-assertion of the uniqueness of God. Because of that, the people are to keep the laws and commands that Moses has given them so that they and their descendants may live long in the country that the Lord has given them for ever.

Perhaps our lives and our experiences with God have not been marked with such dramatic signs but, if we reflect a little, we will soon realise that he has done wonders in our lives. Let us recall them today them, be truly thankful and respond with loving and unconditional praise and service. Our Faith is both a gift and a privilege.

Gospel (Matthew 16:24-28)

Jesus has already shocked his disciples by telling them in advance what is going to happen to him as Messiah. Now he goes further and tells them that they, too, will have to have a part in his experience.

They are to follow in his footsteps. Like him, they are to be ready to take up their cross, whatever it may be, and carry it behind him. For some, it will mean dying for Christ and the Kingdom. For others, it will mean living totally for Christ and the Kingdom. Notice, Jesus tells them to take up their own cross, not his. That cross will be different for each person; it takes the form of some difficult thing which it is clear we must accept and not run away from. It is not to be sought for; that would not be a healthy thing to do. It will come, unmarked and unchosen but clear.

The other way, to avoid all pain and seek only what brings pleasure and enjoyment, is to go down a cul-de-sac, a blind alley that leads nowhere. That is what we mean by trying ‘to save our life’. It is a sure way to lose it.

What is the use of “gaining the whole world”, becoming a multi-millionaire and being profoundly unhappy? Living for oneself only is to end up finding one’s self dying. Letting go of one’s life to live for others, to live for truth, love and justice is to live a full life, even if shortened by physical death. Many of the saints died long before their time but achieved in a few years what most of us cannot do in a long life.”Consummatus in breve, explevit tempora multa” is a scriptural phrase applied to some of the saints who died relatively young. It says that, although their life came to an early end, they had filled it with many good things.

Week 18 | Saturday

Deuteronomy 6:4-13; Matthew 17:14-20

First Reading (Deuteronomy 6:4-13)

Our reading comes from the second of Moses’ three discourses in this book. It is one of the key texts in Scripture for both Jews and Christians and consists of two parts. The first is to make our love for God the absolutely central characteristic of all our lives.

The opening words are: “Hear, O Israel!” and give the passage its common name, ‘Shema’, which is the Hebrew word for ‘hear’. It has become the Jewish confession of faith, recited daily by observant Jews.

It begins with the first principle: “Yahweh our God is the one, the only Yahweh.” This is certainly a declaration of monotheism. It is a divinely revealed insight, especially important in view of the multiplicity of Baals and other gods of Canaan and elsewhere, which one meets right through the history of Israel both in the time of the Kings and during the later exile. Again and again, the Israelites would worship these gods (cf. for example, Judges 2:11-13).

Yahweh is not only the God of Israel; he is the only God. This is not where the Israelites originally began from. Throughout their history, a faith in a unique God is something that became more precise with time and experience, especially under the impact of the covenant and God’s choice of Israel as his chosen people. The existence of other gods was never explicitly affirmed but more and more became the affirmation of the living God, the unique creator and master of the world as well as of his people. This is accompanied by the constant denial of other gods, first as false and then as non-existing.

Then comes the necessary human response to this statement: “You must love Yahweh your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your strength.”

This love, the echo of God’s love for his people, embraces the fear of God (in the sense of a deep respect and sense of awe), the duty of service and the observance of precepts. Strangely, outside Deuteronomy there is no explicit command to love God but its equivalent is found, for instance, in 2 Kings 23:25. Speaking of King Josiah, the Scripture says: “No king before him turned to Yahweh as he did, with all his heart, all his soul, all his strength, in perfect loyalty to the Law of Moses.” And in Hosea we read: “Faithful love is what pleases me, not sacrifice” (Hos 6:6). Although the command does not appear, the Psalms and the prophetic books, especially Hosea and Jeremiah, are full of the love of God.

These words, then, are to be engraved on each one’s heart. This would become a feature especially characteristic of the “new covenant”, with the emphasis on the inner spirit more than on external behaviour.

These words are to be constantly communicated to one’s children and in every situation.

They are to be fastened on one’s hand as a sign and on one’s forehead as a headband.

They are to be written on the doorposts of one’s house and on one’s gates.

The urging to bind the words to the wrist and as a headband was surely meant in a figurative sense but it was, and is, taken literally by some Jews. They tie phylacteries to their foreheads and left arms. ‘Phylacteries’ are small boxes containing strips of parchment on which the words of the text are inscribed. They also attach mezuzot (small wooden or metal containers in which passages of Scripture are placed) to the doorframes of their houses. However, a figurative interpretation is supported by other Old Testament texts.

In the Gospel, we see the Pharisees following this custom but Jesus criticises them because it was purely an external manifestation which did not correspond to what was going on in their hearts. They literally wore their heart on their sleeve. Speaking of some Pharisees Jesus said: “They tie up heavy burdens and lay them on people’s shoulders, but will they lift a finger to move them? No they! Everything they do is done to attract attention, like wearing broader headbands and longer tassels. . .” (Matt 23:5).

Finally, Jesus, quoting today’s passage, lays it down as the greatest commandment of all (Matt 22:37). However, he significantly links this commandment with another from Leviticus 19:18: “Love your neighbour as yourself.” And, to remove all ambiguity, he tells the parable of the Good Samaritan to show exactly who our neighbour is (Luke 10:25-37). In the Gospel, these two commandments cannot be separated and so we read in the First Letter of John: “Anyone who says he loves God and hates his brother is a liar, since whoever does not love the brother whom he can see cannot love God whom he has not seen” (1 John 4:19-20).

The second part of today’s reading is a reminder to the Israelites that it was Yahweh who brought them into the land which he swore to their ancestors Abraham, Isaac and Jacob he would give. Moreover they should not take for granted the presence of large and prosperous towns which they did not build, houses full of good things they did not provide, vineyards and olive trees they did not plant. After they have eaten all the food they want, they must not forget that it was Yahweh who brought them there from a life of slave-labour in Egypt.

Because the emphasis in Scripture is always on what God does and not on what his people achieve, they are never to forget what he has done for them.

“Yahweh your God is the one you must fear, him alone you must serve, his is the name by which you must swear.” Here, to ‘serve’ God means especially to ‘worship’ him. In this sense it is quoted by Jesus during his temptations in the desert as an argument against worshipping the devil (Matt 4:10)

Both of these lessons we need to take to heart.

- Loving and serving our God in our brothers and sisters has to be the determining factor of everything in our lives.

- And let us not take any of the good things in life for granted or as somehow our right. All is gift.

Gospel (Matthew 17:14-20)

Today we have the story of a father distraught over the erratic behaviour of his son. As usually is the case, Mark’s telling of this story is much more dramatic. Nevertheless, Matthew keeps the main points.

There is the desperation of the father who feels helpless at the apparent uncontrollable behaviour of his son. The symptoms appear very similar to epilepsy, a condition which is quite well understood today and whose causes - at least in general - are known. But it must have been easy for people in those days to believe that some evil power had suddenly taken hold of an otherwise normal person to make them behave in such bizarre ways.

The man had at first approached the disciples who were of no help. Jesus expresses dismay and disappointment at the people’s lack of faith, presumably including that of his own disciples, in his criticism.

Jesus then drives out the demon plaguing the boy and he was made whole. The disciples, who had done their share of healing on their missionary excursions, wondered why they were not able to heal the boy.”Because you have so little trust/faith,” he told them. Even a tiny amount of real trust in God can move mountains, he said.”Nothing would be impossible for you.”

How strong is my faith and trust in God’s care of me? Jesus’ words, of course, are not a carte blanche just to ask for anything that comes into our heads. It is not an invitation to manipulate God; on the contrary, it is a call to put all our trust in God knowing that, whatever happens to us, he has our best interests at heart. Such a faith, accompanied by a deep love, is what brings happiness and peace into our lives.

Week 19 | Monday

Deuteronomy 10:12-22; Matthew 17:22-27

Our reading again comes from the second of the three discourses of Moses which form the major part of Deuteronomy. Today’s passage comes from the last part of the discourse.

It is a beautiful call for the people of Israel to be filled with the very spirit of their God.

“What does Yahweh your God ask of you?” is Moses’ question to the people. He himself gives the beautiful answer:

“To fear Yahweh your God, to follow all his ways, to love him, to serve Yahweh your God with all your heart and soul, to keep the commandments and laws of Yahweh, which I am laying down today for your own good.”

He tells them that they are living in a world where everything above, on and below the earth belongs to Yahweh and comes from him.”To your God belong heaven and the heaven of heavens.” ‘Heaven of heavens’ is a Hebrew superlative meaning the highest of heavens.

Yet, out all he has made, in his mysterious ways “for love of them” he chose their ancestors to be his own in a special way. This love extends to their descendants down to the present day.

The sign of their belonging to God is their circumcision but they must go further and circumcise their hearts and resistant the Lord’s call no longer. Circumcision was the outer sign of belonging to God’s people but that was not enough. The bonding must reach deep down into the heart. It cannot stop at a merely external physical badge; membership brings spiritual obligations with it.

So, Jeremiah says: “For the sake of the Lord, be circumcised, remove the foreskins of your hearts” (Jer 4:4). The “uncircumcised” heart is closed and unreceptive to God’s grace and guidance. Elsewhere the Scripture speaks also of “uncircumcised” ears (Jer 6:10) which are closed to the voice of God and “uncircumcised” lips, which do not speak well.

Moses then gives a wonderful description of God:

“God of gods, Lord of lords, the great God, mighty and awesome, who has no favourites, accepts no bribes. It is he who seeks justice for the orphan and the widow, who loves the stranger, feeding and clothing him.” So the Israelites must imitate their God in loving the stranger, because they themselves were once strangers in Egypt. Here, we have an advance beyond concern only for their own people.

Their total allegiance must be to this God. He is the one they must fear and serve; to him they must hold firm; in his name only will they make their oaths. He is the one they must praise, the one who did these great and terrible things of which they themselves were witnesses. This can refer to all the wonders that happened before they left Egypt, the happenings at Mount Sinai and the many other signs of God’s power they experienced in their 40 years of wanderings.

And although their ancestors - Jacob and his family - were only 70 persons when they went down to Egypt (described at the end of Genesis), their numbers are now as many as the stars of heaven, thus fulfilling the promise made so long ago to Abraham when his wife was still barren and he had no heir and no prospect of one.

Moses is emphasising that their being God’s chosen people is not just a privilege to be exploited but a responsibility which calls for even greater accountability.

We are moving now into the spirituality of the prophets. In the earlier times of hardship, the Israelites were more concerned with justice for themselves and looking for the end of a life of suffering. Now, with better times, they can begin to look around them, because with better times - as so often happens - comes social inequality.

The emphasis, too, on loving God is moving from focusing on God alone and the observance of law to a greater sensitivity to the needs of those around, including the total stranger and the outsider. The Gospel will make it abundantly clear that there can be no love of God which does not include going through other people.

Matthew 17:22-27

For the second time Jesus warns his disciples about what is to come: his suffering, death and resurrection. Once again the word ‘delivered’ or ‘handed over’ (Greek paradidomi) is used. It is a kind of refrain running right through the Gospel and applied to John the Baptist, to Jesus, to the disciples and the giving of the Body of Christ in the Eucharist.

We are told that the disciples are overwhelmed with grief over what Jesus says. Whether that is purely out of sorrow for Jesus or whether it represents their disillusionment, is hard to say. This was not the kind of end they were expecting to the coming of the Messiah.

The second part of today’s reading is a peculiar scene, only to be found in Matthew. The collectors of the Temple tax want to know whether Jesus pays it or not. Peter assures them that he does.

But on entering the house (there is that anonymous ‘house’ again, which seems to symbolise the Church or the Christian community) Jesus asks Peter (though, interestingly, he calls him by his old name ‘Simon’): “Do kings collect tax from their sons, that is, their subjects, or from foreigners?” “From others,” replies Peter. And, in fact, the Romans did collect tax from their colonised peoples and not from their own citizens.

In that case, Jesus says, the sons, that is, he and his disciples, should be exempt from paying the Temple tax. After all, the Temple is God’s house and Jesus is his Son and his disciples are his brothers, sons of the same Father. They should therefore be exempt.

But to avoid giving scandal and misunderstanding, Peter is told to catch a fish in whose mouth he will find a shekel, enough to pay for both of them. A half shekel was levied each year on all Jewish males of 20 years or older. It was for the upkeep of the Temple. A half shekel at this time was roughly equivalent to two days’ wages.

This passage seems to reflect a dilemma of the early Church. A double dilemma. Should Christians who are Jews continue to pay the Temple tax? Should Christians in general have to pay tax to a pagan government, especially one whose emperor claims to be a deity?

The first dilemma solved itself in time, especially with the destruction of the Temple (which had already taken place when Matthew was written). The second dilemma took longer. The problem seems to have been solved by the principle laid down elsewhere by Jesus: Give to the emperor what belongs to the emperor and to God what belongs to God.

We too have to discern what is legitimately required of us by our governments and make our contribution to the needs of our society while at the same time not compromising on issues where universal principles of truth and justice are at stake. Civil disobedience is sometimes not only a right but also a responsibility.

Week 19 | Tuesday

Deuteronomy 31:1-8; Matthew 18:1-5,10,12-14

We come to the last part of Deuteronomy which tells of the last days of Moses. Today’s reading deals with handing on the baton of leadership to Joshua.

Moses knows that his end is near. He tells the people that he is already 120 years old (probably not to be taken too literally) and no longer capable of being their leader. This is not a reference to any physical disability. The reason is that God has forbidden him to lead the people into the Promised Land.”You shall not cross this Jordan.” This was the punishment of his sin, his lack of trust in Yahweh’s protection of his people. (We read about this in last Thursday’s reading, Num 20:2-13.)

The people need not fear because Yahweh will be with them as they conquer the land.”He himself will destroy and dispossess these nations confronting you.” And he gives his encouragement to Joshua who will take his place as their leader.

Yahweh will treat the resident peoples as he treated Sihon and Og the Amorite kings and their country - he wiped them out. He will put the resident peoples at the Israelites’ mercy and will deal with them exactly as laid down by the commandments he gave.

Moses passes on Yahweh’s message to the people: “Be strong, stand firm, have no fear, do not be afraid of them, for Yahweh your God is going with you; he will not fail you or desert you.” The Lord’s exhortation is often given through his servants to the people of Israel. So also to Joshua, to Solomon and to Hezekiah’s military officers. By trusting in the Lord and obeying him, his followers will be victorious in spite of great obstacles.

Then Moses summoned Joshua in the presence of all the people and told him also to be “strong and firm”. He would have the privilege of leading the people into the land which Yahweh long ago had sworn to his ancestors he would give to his people. And he has no need to worry because Yahweh will show the way, will be together with his people and not let them down.”Have no fear; do not be alarmed.”

Reading this account, it is difficult sometimes not to feel that we have here to some extent a rationalisation of their entering someone else’s territory and taking it by force from its legitimate inhabitants, pagans though they may have been. The same questions arise in the establishment of the State of Israel in the last century and even more so in the establishment of the settlements beyond its internationally recognised borders.

The history of the Church also is not without examples of “God’s will” being used to justify behaviour that later seems altogether unacceptable.

Matthew 18:1-5, 10, 12-14

The discourse on the church

Today we come to the fourth of the five discourses which are the distinctive characteristic of Matthew’s gospel. This one focuses on the Church, the Christian community, and in particular the relationships between its members.

So it begins by asking the question: Who is the greatest in the Kingdom and, by implication, in the Christian community, which is a sign of the Kingdom? Jesus answers the question very simply by putting a child in front of his disciples. To become the greatest is to become a small child.

Why? Children have their qualities and their defects. They are intellectually and emotionally immature. But children have some precious qualities which they often lose as they grow up. They are born free of prejudice and they are totally open to learning. It is this quality that we need to enter the Reign of God. To be totally open and free of prejudice when it comes to listening to God. To be fully teachable and malleable and flexible. Then we are ready to receive everything that God wants us to have and to become everything God wants us to become. Furthermore, to welcome a person who has these qualities in Jesus’ name is to welcome Christ himself.

From that the Gospel moves on to another related consideration. It skips a passage which deals with those who cause others to fall into sin and the kind of punishment such people deserve.

Instead, it moves from children to the ‘little ones’. These little ones are not just children but the weaker ones in the community and they may be adults. But they are the ones who can very easily be led astray by the bad example which others give. And there are severe penalties for doing this (mentioned in the omitted passage).

This is emphasised by the parable of the lost sheep. God is compared to a shepherd who has lost just one sheep out of a hundred. When he finds it again he is happier than over the other ninety-nine which have not strayed. Such, the gospel concludes, is the desire of God, that not even one of the ‘little ones’ be lost.

How terrible, then, if one of us is responsible for someone being separated from God forever! One feels that it happens quite a lot in our society and in our Church.

Week 19 | Wednesday

Deuteronomy 34:1-12; Matthew 18:15-20

Our final reading from the book of Deuteronomy is also the whole of the final chapter of the book. It is also our last reading from the Pentateuch.

The death of Moses ends the long saga which began when he first received the call to lead his people out of slavery in Egypt, through the great experiences on Mount Sinai, the tribulations of the 40 years in the desert until the moment when they reach the threshold of the Promised Land.

As the reading opens, we see Moses leaving the plains of Moab and climbing Mount Nebo, described as “the peak of Pisgah opposite Jericho”. He went in obedience to the Lord’s command, mentioned earlier (32:48ff). The plains of Moab denotes the plain lying between the mountains of Moab, which lie to the east of the Dead Sea, and the River Jordan.

Here he has a vision which embraces the whole Promised Land, into which he will not go, but of which he thus takes possession behalf of the people. He could not actually see the whole territory with the naked eye from the top of the mountain.

He saw the Promised Land - from Gilead as far as Dan, the whole of Naphthali, the country of Ephraim and Manasseh, the whole country of Judah as far as the Western Sea (the Mediterranean), the Negeb and the region of the valley of Jericho, city of palm trees, as far as Zoar.

Dan was in the very north of the country. (The names of the provinces come from the names of Jacob’s sons.)

Naphthali lay immediately to the south and southwest of Dan.

Manasseh and Ephraim occupied the centre of the country, just north of Jerusalem.

Judah stretched southwards from Jerusalem (Jerusalem was in Judah).

South of Judah was the Negeb, lying west of the Dead Sea.

Jericho was on the north end of the Dead Sea and Zoar at the southern end.

Pointing to the whole territory spread out below, Yahweh says to Moses: “This is the country which I promised on oath to give to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.” He then says: “I have allowed you to see it for yourself, but you yourself will not cross into it.”

Moses’ life work was now over. He had been shown the goal of all his labours but not permitted to enjoy it. However, he did take possession of it in the name of the people.

There in Moab, “Moses, the servant of the Lord, died as Yahweh had decreed”. ‘Servant of the Lord’ is a special title used to refer to those whom the Lord, as the Great King, has taken into his service; they serve as members of God’s royal administration. For example, it was used especially of Abraham, Moses, Joshua, David, the prophets, Israel collectively, and even of a foreign king the Lord used to carry out his purposes (Nebuchadnezzar, Jer 25:9). In Nebuchadnezzar’s case, the king becomes an instrument by which God can reveal his power and glory.

Earlier God told Moses he would actually die on Mount Nebo itself (Deut 32:50). He was buried in the valley below, in the country of Moab, opposite Beth-peor, to the east of the northern shores of the Dead Sea. However, the author says that no one now knows where his grave is.

He was 120 years old when he died but in full use of his faculties, “eyes undimmed, vigour unimpaired”. This is perhaps a round number, indicating three generations of about 40 years each.

The mourning by the Israelites went on for 30 days. Once this period was over, Joshua, son of Nun, assumed leadership. He was full of wisdom because Moses had laid his hands on him and the Israelites accepted him as the successor to Moses.

In a final encomium, the author says that, ever since his time, there never was such a prophet in Israel like Moses, the man who knew Yahweh face to face. What wonders Yahweh caused Moses to perform in Egypt against the Pharaoh and the whole country! “How mighty the hand and great the fear that Moses wielded in the eyes of all Israel!”

That is, no one could compare to Moses until the coming of Jesus. See the Letter to the Hebrews (Heb 3:1-6), where Moses the “servant” (Heb 3:5) is contrasted with Christ the “son” (Heb 3:6).

We Christians also owe a lot to this great man. His story and the story of his people is also part of our story, part of our tradition and heritage. And it has much to teach us.

Matthew 18:15-20

The discourse on the church (continued):

Today’s part of the discourse shifts from the harm that we can do to others to the harm that others can do to the community and how the community and its members should respond. Clearly we are speaking here of some serious wrong which hurts the mission of the Church community.

The wrongdoer is to be tackled on three levels and this reflects what has just gone before about bringing back the sheep which is lost. Reconciliation, not punishment, is the objective.

If the wrong directly affects one person, then that person or another should go along to the wrongdoer privately and try to help him/her change his/her ways. If this works, then that is the end of the matter. However, if the wrongdoer will not listen, then one or two others who are also aware of the wrongdoing should be brought along as corroboration. This is based on a passage from Deuteronomy: “A single witness cannot suffice to convict a man of a crime or offence of any kind; whatever the misdemeanour, the evidence of two witnesses or three is required to sustain the charge.” (Deut 19:15).

If the wrongdoer remains obstinate in the face of this evidence, then the whole community is to be brought in. And, if in the face of the whole community, there is still no sign of repentance, then the person is to be expelled and treated like “a pagan or a tax collector”, in other words, as a total outsider. The tax collectors were among the most despised people in the community. They were local people employed by Roman tax contractors to collect taxes for them. Because they worked for Rome and often demanded unreasonable payments (they had to make a profit!), they gained a bad reputation and were generally hated and considered traitors to their own people and their religion.

The word Matthew uses for ‘community’ here is ‘church’, ekklesia or, in Hebrew, qahal, which refers to the gathering of a Christian community. As mentioned earlier, this is only one of two places (the other is Matt 16:18) where this term is used in the gospels.

Jesus now goes further in saying that all such decisions by the community have God’s full endorsement: “Whatever you bind on earth shall be considered bound in heaven (i. e. by God)” and “if two of you on earth agree about anything for which they are to pray, it shall be granted to them by my heavenly Father” and “where two or three meet in my name, I shall be there with them”. This mandate seems to be given to the community as a whole and not just to specific individuals.

It would be worth our while going carefully through this text and see how it applies to our church situation today. To what extent do we feel responsible for the wrongdoings of our fellow-Christians? To what extent do we realise that our behaviour both as individuals and groups reflects on the overall witness that the Church is called to give as the Body of Christ? Do people clearly see the message of the Gospel from the way we live both individually and corporately?

While, on the one hand, we are told to be compassionate and non-judgmental, are we over-tolerant of what people in the community who believe that anything they do is just their own business? Every Christian community has a solemn responsibility to give witness to the vision of life that Jesus gave to us. There have then to be standards of behaviour which bind all. Moments of weakness can be and should be treated with compassion but deliberate and continued flouting of our central commitment to truth, love, justice and so on cannot be overlooked or allowed to undermine the central mission of the Christian community to be a sacrament of the Kingdom. It is not a question of image but of our integrity.

What has all this to do with the way we use the Sacrament of Reconciliation and what is the relationship of the sacrament to this passage? The passage is closely linked with what Jesus says about the problem of giving scandal, of being a stumbling block in people coming to Christ. At the same time, as tomorrow’s passage indicates the long-term aim above all is not punishment but reconciliation and healing of divisions.

Week 19 | Thursday

Joshua 3:7-10,11,13-17; Matthew 18:21-19:1

We move on now to the next phase in the history of Israel. We begin reading the book of Joshua. It is the first of the so-called historical books which include Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 and 2 Samuel and 1 and 2 Kings. They are also known as the ‘Early Prophets’.

The book of Joshua falls into three parts:

the conquest of the promised land, ch. 1-12;

the partition of the territory between the tribes, ch. 13-21;

the last days of Joshua, especially his last discourse and the assembly at Shechem, ch. 22-24.

Joshua is the link with the previous five books and takes up where Deuteronomy left off. He was the leader, chosen by Moses and accepted by the people, to lead the Israelites into the Promised Land.

Today’s reading comes from chapter 3 which describes the miraculous crossing of the Jordan into the Promised Land. It is reminiscent of the crossing of the Sea of Reeds when the Israelites escaped from Egypt. Then it was the command of Moses which drove back the sea. Here it is the priests carrying the Ark of the Covenant in which were the tables of the Law, representing the presence and power of God, which stop the river in its flow and allowed all the Israelites to cross in safety. *

As the reading opens we hear Yahweh speak to Joshua: On this very day he will make Joshua great in the eyes of the people so that they will know that, as with Moses in the past, he is with Joshua now. A major purpose for God intervening wondrously in the crossing of the Jordan was to validate the leadership of Joshua. With a miraculous event so much like that of the Sea of Reeds crossing, Joshua’s position as the Lord’s servant would be shown to be comparable to that of Moses.

Joshua is then told to give an order to the priests who were carrying the Ark of the Covenant. When they reached the banks of the Jordan, they were to stop in the river itself. Speaking to the Israelites, he told them to gather together and listen to the words of Yahweh their God. There was going to be a sign by which they would know that the living God was with them and that he was going to drive out the Canaanites [as well as the Hittites, Hivites, Perizzites, Girgashites, Amorites and Jebusites] before them.

The manner by which God is about to bring Israel across the Jordan River, the watery boundary of the Promised Land, will bring assurance that the one true God is with them and that he will surely dislodge the present inhabitants of Canaan. Two fundamental issues are at stake:

1, Who is the true and mighty God - the God of Israel or the god on whom the Canaanites depend (Baal, who was believed to reign as king among the gods because he had triumphed over the sea-god)? By opening the way through the flooded Jordan the Lord would show both Israel and the Canaanites that he is Lord over the waters (as he was at the “Red Sea”, at the Flood and at Creation) and that he is able to establish his own order in the world.

2, Who has the rightful claim to the land - the Lord or the Canaanites? By passing safely through the Jordan at the head of his army the Lord showed the rightness of his claim on the land. In the ancient Near East a common way for obtaining the judicial verdict of the gods was by compelling the accused to submit to trial by water ordeal. Usually this involved casting him into a river (if the accused drowned, the gods had found him guilty; if not, the gods had declared him innocent). In Israel, however, another form of water ordeal was practiced. Significantly, the Lord would enter the Jordan first [in the Ark with the priests] and then remain there until his whole army had crossed safely over. Thus his claim to the land was vindicated before the eyes of all who heard about it. And it was Yahweh’s claim, not Israel’s; she came through the Jordan only with him and as his army, “baptised” to his service.

It was a message intended not only for the Israelites but for the residents of Canaan as well and they would understand the symbols very well.

Now Joshua tells the people: “Look! The ark of the covenant of the Lord of all the earth is about to move into the Jordan at your head.” As soon as the priests carrying the ark put their feet into the waters of the Jordan, he says, the river’s waters will suddenly be cut off, the upper waters will suddenly stand up in a heap and stop flowing.

What Joshua foretold immediately took place. As the people left their tents to cross the river, the priests with the ark went ahead of them. As soon as the priests stepped into the river, the upper waters piled in a heap and stopped flowing at Adam, a town near Zarethan. It was also near the entrance of the River Jabbok, which flows into the Jordan on its east bank.

And this happened even though at that time of the year, the harvest season, the river was in spate.

The harvest season in the lower Jordan valley was towards the end of March and the beginning of April, when the grain and other crops that grew during the rainy season of winter were reaped. The crossing took place “on the 10th day of the first month” of the Hebrew year, which began with the first new moon after the spring equinox. At this time of the year the Jordan would be swollen as a result of the winter rains and the melting snow from Mount Hermon.

The Hebrew for ‘heap’ twice used here can also be found in the poetic accounts of the Sea of Reeds crossing. The sudden damming of the river could have been caused by a landslide, as has happened on other occasions. According to an Arab historian, something similar happened in AD 1267; landslides dammed the river in this area (Adama-Damieh) for several hours. And, as recently as 1927 a blockage of the water in this area was recorded that lasted over 20 hours.

Nevertheless, the miraculous element of the event is not diminished, because God, who foretold it (Jos 3:13), also caused it to take place at precisely the right moment (Jos 3:15), whether or not he used natural forces to accomplish his will. (Similarly, the drying up of the Sea of Reeds has been attributed to the effects of an earthquake in the Mediterranean, perhaps accompanied by a tsunami.)

Meanwhile, the lower reaches of the river flowing into the Sea of Arabah, the Salt Sea, the Dead Sea were completely cut off from the upper waters.

The people now crossed the river near to Jericho. As they did so, the priests carrying the ark stood on dry ground in the middle of the river bed, while the whole of Israel crossed on dry ground until every single person had completed the crossing. The priests stood firm on dry land: signifying that the Lord himself remained in the place of danger until all Israel had crossed the Jordan.

This whole operation has the approval and protection of Yahweh. It is the fulfilment of the solemn promise he made to provide a home for a wandering people.

It brings to closure the epic saga which began with the crossing of the Sea of Reeds and the Hebrew people escaping to freedom and now ends with another water crossing and the entry into the long-awaited Promised Land.

The Jerusalem Bible shows the links between the two events:

There is a deliberate parallelism between the narratives of the crossing of the Jordan and entry into Canaan and the narrative of the Exodus from Egypt. The editor himself calls attention to it (3:7): Yahweh halts the Jordan just as he dried up the Sea of Reeds; the Ark of Yahweh leads the Israelites as did the pillar of cloud or of fire; Joshua plays the part that Moses played in the Exodus; and just as the adults of the Exodus period were circumcised, so in their turn are their desert-born children; the manna that had served Israel in the desert ceases as soon as the Israelites enter Canaan and the Passover is celebrated in Gilgal after the second ‘crossing’ as it had been celebrated in Egypt before the first. The parallelism between the events at the beginning and the end of the Exodus produces at the departure from Egypt a water miracle analogous to the water miracles at the crossing of the Jordan. As the Passion and Resurrection of Christ spiritually renew the events of the Exodus, so Joshua, who gave the events of the Exodus their physical fulfilment, was regarded by some Fathers as an ante-type of Jesus, who has the same name. (Joshua is another form of the name Jesus and means ‘God saves’.) (edited)

In the liturgy of the Catholic and other Christian churches, these water crossings are seen as anticipatory symbols of the saving waters of Baptism. They are recalled especially during the liturgy of the Easter Vigil when the Baptismal water is blessed.

Let us remember today our own Baptism and how its meaning is symbolised in my daily life as a follower of Christ.

Matthew 18:21-19:1

The discourse on the church (continued):

The last part of the discourse is on forgiveness. This is not unconnected with the previous section on excommunicating the unrepentant brother or sister. As soon as the brother/sister does repent, there must be forgiveness - not once but indefinitely, 77 times.

The reason is given in the parable which Jesus speaks about the two servants in debt. The one who had a huge debt to the king was forgiven but then refused to forgive a relatively trivial debt to a fellow servant. (Ten thousand talents would be the equivalent of hundreds of millions of a major currency today and the 300 denarii would be the equivalent about three months’ wages.)

The ones with the big debt to the king are clearly ourselves; the ones with the small debts to us are our brothers and sisters.

We do not expect God to forgive us once or twice or any limited number of times but every time. It is nowhere written that we have, say, only 10 chances of going to confession and, once our quota is used up, there is nothing left. But, if that is true of our relationship with God, it also has to be true in our relationships with others. We can never refuse an offer of reconciliation. And, we might add, forgiveness is only complete when reconciliation takes place.

This is not at all the same as turning a blind eye to wrongdoing. Yesterday’s text made that very clear. We are talking about healing divisions between people; we must never put obstacles in the way of that.

We have now come to the end of this discourse indicated by the first words of chapter 19: “When Jesus finished these words. . .”

Week 19 | Friday

Joshua 24:1-13; Matthew 19:3-12

We go to the end of the book of Joshua. The intervening chapters which we have skipped deal mainly with the conquest of the Promised Land by the Israelites and later with the sharing out of the land among the tribes of Israel.

In today’s reading, Joshua asks his hearers to recognise God’s intervention on behalf of Israel. We will read the second half of the address in tomorrow’s reading.

An ancient tradition underlies this chapter. It possibly implies something more than a renewal of the covenant, namely, an offer of the Israelites’ faith to associated groups which had not experienced either the marvels or the revelation of the desert period. However this may be, the pact of Shechem confirmed the religious unity, and thus preserved the political unity, of the tribes. It was to have a decisive effect on the history of the nation.

Chapter 23 begins Joshua’s last words and testament and today’s reading is part of a great assembly at Shechem where Israel is once again called to a renewal of the covenant. It was Joshua’s final official act as the Lord’s servant, mediator of the Lord’s rule over his people. In this he followed the example of Moses, whose final official act was also a call to covenant renewal - of which Deuteronomy is the preserved document.

With its position right in the centre of the country, Shechem was ideally suited for tribal gatherings and its history made it the ideal place for making this religious pact: Abraham had built an altar there, Jacob had bought land there, and there had been buried the idols brought from Mesopotamia. (Some commentators believe that Jacob’s well, where Jesus met the Samaritan woman [John 4], was here and that the well and its water is understood as a symbol of the Old Covenant.)

Joshua asks his hearers to recognise God’s ever-continuing intervention on behalf of Israel.

The elders of Israel, its leaders, judges and officials are all assembled in the presence of the Lord. Joshua then addresses the people bringing a message from Yahweh. Only a divinely appointed mediator would dare to speak for God with direct discourse, as Joshua does here.

There follows a brief history of all that God has done for his people from the earliest times. In accordance with the common ancient Near Eastern practice of making treaties (covenants), a brief recital of the past history of the relationship precedes the making of covenant commitments. Joshua here focuses on the separation of Abraham from his polytheistic family, the deliverance of Israel from Egypt and the Lord’s establishment of his people in Canaan.

From time immemorial their ancestors, Terah, father of Abraham and Nahor, lived beyond the River and worshipped other gods. The ‘River’ is the Euphrates. We know that Abraham originally came from Ur of the Chaldees, in the south of present-day Iran.

Yahweh then brought Abraham from across the River and led him through the length and breadth of Canaan (where the people have now returned).

Abraham had, as promised, many descendants. There was Isaac, who had two sons, Jacob and Esau. To Esau was given the land of Seir, while Jacob and his sons settled in Egypt.

Then he sent Moses and Aaron, brought the plagues on Egypt and then led his people out.

As they left and reached the Sea of Reeds pursued by the Egyptians, the Lord put a cloud between his people and the Egyptians, who were drowned in the waters. After that, for a long time they lived in the desert (there is no mention of Sinai). He then brought them to the land of the Amorites, who lived on the east side of the Jordan. They made war on the Israelites but were defeated and their country captured. Then Balak, son of Zippor, king of Moab, made war on Israel. He sent for Balaam, son of Beor, to go and curse the Israelites. But the Lord would not listen to Balaam; instead, he turned Balaam’s curse into a blessing (see Numbers 23-24)

The Israelites then crossed the Jordan and came to Jericho. The peoples of Jericho made war on the Israelites. But “I put them all at your mercy.” Yahweh also sent hornets ahead of the Israelites, which drove out the two Amorite kings. ‘Hornets’ may refer to the Egyptians who had long used the hornet as a national symbol, in which case Egypt’s military campaigns in Canaan may be in mind. But “the hornet” may also refer to the reports about Israel that spread panic among the Canaanites (cf. Jos 2:11; 5:1; 9:24). It may also simply indicate some troublesome afflictions, even leprosy. In any case, all that happened was God’s work: it was “not the work of your sword or of your bow”.

Finally, Yahweh reminds his people: “I have given you a country for which you have not toiled, towns you have not built, although you live in them, vineyards and olive groves you have not planted, although you eat their fruit.”

All in all, Yahweh is making clear that he has been with his people all the way from the earliest times to the present. Let them not think that it is all their own doing. At the same time, he is offering them a choice to continue following Yahweh or to opt for the far lesser gods of the surrounding peoples which they are often tempted to follow.

Maybe we, too, might look back and see the hand of God in the events of our lives, things which happened quite beyond our expectations or our ability to bring them about.

We might also reflect which are the gods in our lives we are tempted to follow. The gods of mammon: money, career, success, enjoyment, consumerism, status and image. Can we really opt for these gods and still be totally committed to the one God?

Matthew 19:3-12

We return now, after the discourse on the Church, to a narrative section which describes Jesus’ ministry in Judea and Jerusalem. He is no longer in the north, in Galilee but in the south. We are now entering the sixth section of Matthew’s gospel which will conclude with the parables of the last times.

Today’s passage begins with a discussion about a contentious issue between Jesus and the Pharisees, an issue which continues to be contentious in our own time. The question in itself is straightforward but, as was often the case, it was thrown at Jesus to test his orthodoxy with regard to the Law.

They ask: “Is it against the Law for a man to divorce his wife on any pretext whatever?” Among the Jews there were two schools of thought on divorce. The school of Shammai would only allow marital unfaithfulness as a justification for divorce. The Hillel school, however, would allow a man to divorce his wife if she did anything he did not like, such as burning his food! Jesus clearly sides with the first interpretation.

Using two passages from the creation story in the book of Genesis Jesus gives an uncompromising reply which it would be difficult for his opponents to challenge: “The creator from the beginning ‘made them male and female’ and said, ‘This is why a man must leave father and mother, and cling to his wife, and the two become one flesh’.” Jesus goes on to say, “They are no longer two, therefore, but one body. So then, what God has united, no human being must separate.” And, in fact, in a good marriage, the two becoming one flesh is a reality. It is in the death of one partner that that can become very clear.

Marriage, therefore, as the intimate bonding of a man and woman is part of God’s plan for the human race; it is not something to be undone by us. However, the Pharisees are not satisfied with this answer. They press their case further by asking: “Why did Moses command that a writ of dismissal should be given in cases of divorce?” Jesus replies that that was simply a concession to the “unteachability” of the people in his own time but that it was not the situation from the beginning. The purpose of the writ was obviously to formalise a separation and allow a husband to enter into another marriage.

Jesus says that “the man who divorces his wife. . . and marries another, is guilty of adultery”. Nothing is said of the woman who might divorce; in a patriarchal and male-dominated world this would have been far less common, if not impossible. The woman had very little say in such matters. (In Mark’s version of this passage, both husbands and wives are included. He was writing for a Gentile audience where the rules were somewhat different.)

There is, however, an exception mentioned only by Matthew which has caused problems for exegetes and moral theologians. He has Jesus give “fornication” as one possible reason justifying divorce. The problem is that the word Matthew uses, porneia, is not clear in its meaning. It is variously translated as ‘fornication’, ‘lewd conduct’, ‘unfaithfulness’, or ‘marital unfaithfulness’. And it seems to apply only to the wife.

Unfaithfulness, leading to an illegitimate pregnancy, would, of course, in that society be a very serious breach of family purity and the integrity of the family (i. e. the father’s) line. The child born of such a relationship would be a bastard, coming from another family line and, at birth, might not be recognisable as such. In fact, a wife could be stoned to death for entering into such a relationship.

Jesus seems to say that, in such a case, a man would be justified in separating from such a wife and in entering on another marriage. Otherwise, any repudiation of the marriage contract for any other reason and to enter another contract would be adultery.

In our secular societies, unfaithfulness as well as many lesser reasons are given for justifying a legal divorce. If the original contract is known to be valid, the Catholic Church does not recognise any reason for its termination. However, in these times, divorce is not always the result of one partner’s decision. It is often the result of the mutual breakdown of the marriage relationship where they can no longer live together with mutual love and respect but where there are mutual feelings of hostility and unhappiness which are irreconcilable. Of course, the Church allows and may even encourage legal separation in situations of serious incompatibility but it does not allow remarriage. Even so, it is well known that many Catholics do enter a second marriage, which can turn out to be stable and enduring.

Whether this position will be maintained in the future remains to be seen. The issue is seen nowadays to be more complex and the nature of marriage and the contract contain elements not considered in the past.

In any case, Jesus’ position was seen by his own disciples as rather severe. If things were the way he saw them, then they thought it would be better not to get married at all! Jesus makes a statement which perhaps we should listen to more carefully than we often do. While, on the one hand, he lays down a clear principle he also indicates that not everyone may have the strength to observe it. There seems to be a call, then, for some compassion and flexibility in implementation.”It is not everyone who can accept what I have said, but only those to whom it is granted.”

He goes on to describe three kinds of people who can live lives free from sexual activity:

those who are congenitally impotent (“born that way from their mother’s womb”);

those who are physically castrated (“made so by human intervention”) - what are commonly called ‘eunuchs’; and, thirdly, “those who have made themselves that way for the sake of the kingdom of heaven”. This last group can include either those, who like Paul, choose to live celibate lives in order to work for the Kingdom and the Gospel or those whose marriages have broken down for one reason or another and choose to remain celibate for the rest of their lives also for the sake of the Gospel. This last does not seem to be a universal requirement: “Let anyone accept this who can.”

Marriage is seen here very much linked to the call to work for the Kingdom. If it is an obstacle, it should be avoided; if not, then one can and should work for the Kingdom through one’s marriage.

Week 19 | Saturday

Joshua 24:14-29; Matthew 19:13-15

This is the last of our readings from the book of Joshua. It is an immediate continuation of yesterday as Joshua gives his final words to the tribes gathered at Shechem. It consists of the second and third parts of the whole passage:

in Part Two (vv. 14-24) all the people declare for Yahweh and renounce pagan gods and in Part Three (vv. 25-29) a covenant is adopted and its statutes committed to writing.

Having reminded them of all that Yahweh did for them from time immemorial down to the present, Joshua urges the people to fear the Lord and to serve him truly and sincerely. ‘Fear’ here means to trust, worship and serve in a spirit of deep respect for the immensity of God. There is no place for fear in the ordinary sense before our loving God.”True love casts out fear.”

They are to get rid of the gods their polytheistic ancestors served those days long beyond the Euphrates in Mesopotamia and later in Egypt. In Ur and Haran, Abraham’s antecedents, Terah’s family, would have been exposed to the worship of the moon-god, Nanna or Sin. The sin of building the golden calf at the foot of Mount Sinai was primarily that of making an image of Yahweh but it probably was also influenced by Apis, the sacred bull of Egypt.

With a slight touch of mockery, Joshua tells the people that, if they find serving Yahweh is not a good thing, let them make up their minds which gods they want to serve, whether those of their ancestors in Mesopotamia or those of the Amorites, in whose land they are right now. There is a suggestion that they are not totally committed.

As far as Joshua and his family are concerned, they will continue to serve Yahweh. Joshua publicly makes his own commitment, hoping to elicit a similar commitment from Israel.

With one voice, the people affirm their allegiance to Yahweh.”Far be it from us to desert Yahweh and serve other gods!” It was Yahweh who brought them and their forebears all the way from Egypt, a place of slave-labour; Yahweh who worked all those great wonders before their very eyes; Yahweh who kept them safe among all the different people through whom they passed. It was Yahweh, too, who drove out all the nations so that they could take over the land. They conclude: “We, too, shall serve Yahweh, for he is our God.”

Joshua, however, is somewhat sceptical of their promises and warns them that they will, in fact, not be able to serve Yahweh. He is warning them of over-confidence. Fidelity to God’s service is not easy, and therefore those who take such solemn obligations on themselves must be ever vigilant against human weakness. Time will show just how attractive the Canaanite gods were to the Israelites.

They must remember that Yahweh is a holy God, a jealous God who will not tolerate their misdeeds and sins. If they desert Yahweh and turn again to the gods of other peoples, “he will bring suffering on you again and, in spite of all he did for you in the past, will destroy you.” But again the people insist: “No! Yahweh is the one we mean to serve.”

To which Joshua replies: “You are now witnesses to yourselves that you have chosen to serve Yahweh.” “Right on! Witnesses we are!” they cry out with one voice.

In that case, retorts Joshua, “Banish the foreign gods which you have with you and give your allegiance to Yahweh, God of Israel!” This was a direct challenge. It was likely that some of them did have around them other gods represented by idols of wood and metal, which could easily be thrown away and destroyed, if they were really sincere.

But once again the people make their pledge: “Yahweh our God is the one whom we shall serve; his voice we shall obey!”

Our reading concludes with the Third Part where Joshua makes a solemn covenant between God and the people and lays down a statute and ordinance for them there in Shechem. This consisted of the pledges they had agreed to and the decrees and laws from God.

All was solemnly recorded in the Book of the Law of God and a large stone set up as a memorial. Joshua set it up under the oak tree in Yahweh’s sanctuary at Shechem. Finally, he said to the people: “Look, this stone will be a witness to us, since it has heard all the words that Yahweh has spoken to us. It will be a witness against you, in case you should deny your God.”

The stone was set up as a witness to the covenant renewal that closed Joshua’s ministry. It will be the seventh memorial in the land to remind Israel of what the Lord had done for them through his servant. To these memorials were added the perpetual ruins of Jericho (6:26). This refers to the famous occasion when Joshua and the Israelites marched round the walls of Jericho blowing trumpets, causing the walls of the city to collapse (cf. Joshua chap. 6).

Thus the promised land itself bore full testimony to Israel (seven being the number of completeness) - how she had come into possession of the land and how she would remain in the land only by fulfilling the covenant conditions. The land shouted its own story.

Joshua then dismissed the people, everyone to their own heritage.

Joshua’s work was done and he was ready to go. He died at the venerable age of 110, just 10 years short of his superior and mentor, Moses. Ancient Egyptian records indicate that 110 years was considered to be the ideal life span. It was also the age at which Joseph died.

Joshua was buried at Timnath-Sera, which lay in the highlands of Ephraim, north of Mount Gaash (and about 30 km north of Jerusalem).

We are also told in this passage (though not in the reading) that the mummified remains of Joseph, which had been brought all the way from Egypt at the time of the Exodus, were now buried in Shechem, near the borders between the two Josephite tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh and “in the plot of ground which Jacob had bought from the sons of Hamor, father of Shechem”. This fulfilled a final request Joseph had made before he died (cf. Gen 50:25ff).

With the death of Joshua, the great epic of the Exodus is complete and the people are in their Promised Land, committed to serving Yahweh faithfully as his people forever. As we shall see, it will not quite work out like that.

Matthew 19:13-15

This short passage is an echo of what we already saw at the beginning of the discourse on the Church (Matt 18:1-4). Parents were bringing their children for Jesus to bless. The disciples, with the officiousness of minor officials, thought they were doing their Master a favour by protecting him from such trivial nuisances.

Jesus scolds them; the children are to be allowed to come to him.”It is to such as these that the kingdom of heaven belongs.”

Not to children alone but to those who have the qualities of the child: the simplicity and openness, the teachability, the freedom from prejudice, the readiness for change and adaptation. Only such people are ready to hear the message of the Gospel in its fullness.

The passage leads naturally into the next one about the rich man who asked Jesus what he should do to enter eternal life. For all his wealth, he would prove to be wanting in this particular area of openness.

Week 20 | Monday

Judges 2:11-19; Matthew 19:16-22

Immediately after the book of Joshua comes the book of Judges, which we begin reading today. We will just have four readings from this book.

Today’s reading sets the scene for the unfolding of the book. After the death of Joshua, the people - in spite of the solemn promises they made - gradually began to fall away from serving Yahweh and to follow the gods of the surrounding peoples. For their disloyalty they found themselves the victims of their enemies. Yahweh was no longer with them in their struggles.

This passage comes from some general reflections on the whole period of the ‘judges’. We are given the cyclical theme or paradigm which will be repeated in the case of each judge: Israel deserts Yahweh for Baal; Yahweh hands Israel over to oppressors; Israel cries to Yahweh; Yahweh sends Israel a saviour - and the cycle begins all over again.

However, this theological understanding of history, based on the assumption that the judges succeeded one another in the chronological order given in the book and that each acted for the whole nation (rather than their own tribe), hardly corresponds to historical fact. The book is a compilation of originally independent accounts of local heroes, to whom an arbitrary relationship in time has been given.

As the Book of Judges opens we are told that the generation that followed Joshua neither knew Yahweh nor the deeds that he had done for Israel.

The Israelites were now doing what was evil in Yahweh’s eyes and serving the Baals. ‘Baal’ means ‘lord’. Baal, the god worshipped by the Canaanites and Phoenicians, was variously known to them as the son of Dagon and the son of El. In Aram (Syria) he was called Hadad and in Babylonia Adad. Believed to give fertility to the womb and life-giving rain to the soil, he is pictured as standing on a bull, a popular symbol of fertility and strength. The storm cloud was his chariot, thunder his voice, and lightning his spear and arrows. The worship of Baal involved sacred prostitution and sometimes even child sacrifice. The stories of Elijah and Elisha, as well as many other Old Testament passages, directly or indirectly protest Baalism. Elijah bringing rain down and breaking a drought showed the superior power of Yahweh over Baal, who was supposed to be the god of rain.

The Israelites had deserted Yahweh, the God of their ancestors, who had brought them out of Egypt and followed other gods, from those of the surrounding peoples. They bowed down before these gods; they provoked Yahweh; they deserted Yahweh to serve Baal and Astartes.

In the Bible the phrase ‘Baal and Astarte’ or, in the plural, ‘the Baals and Astartes’ is the common expression for the Canaanite divinities. Baal, ‘the Lord’, is the male god. Astarte was associated with the evening star and was the beautiful goddess of war and fertility. She was worshipped as Ishtar in Babylonia and as Athtart in Aram (Syria). To the Greeks she was Aphrodite, and to the Romans, Venus. Worship of the Astartes involved extremely lascivious practices.

Every time they indulged in this idolatrous behaviour, Yahweh’s anger would grow hot against Israel. He would hand them over to the pillagers who would plunder them. They would be delivered into the hands of the enemies all around them and no longer able to resist them.

Whenever they mounted an expedition, Yahweh’s hand would be there to foil them - as he had warned he would - and, as a result, they were in dire distress.

It was then that the Lord appointed ‘judges’ who would rescue them from the hands of their plunderers. There were 12 judges altogether: six major judges - Othniel, Ehud, Deborah, Gideon, Jephthah and Samson, and six minor ones - Shamgar, Tola, Jair, Ibzan, Elon and Abdon. Notice that one of the judges is a woman, Deborah.

But they would refuse to listen even to the judges. They preferred to prostitute themselves before other gods. They moved far from the path their ancestors had followed in obedience to Yahweh.

Idol worship was always seen as a form of prostitution. Since the Hebrew for ‘Baal’ (‘lord’) was also used by women to refer to their husbands, it is understandable that the metaphor of adultery was commonly used in connection with Israelite worship of Baal (see Hosea 2:2-3,16-17). Yahweh was the true spouse of Israel. The worship of Baal was a kind of adultery or prostitution.

When Yahweh appointed judges, Yahweh was with the judge and rescued them from the hands of their enemies as long as the judge lived, because God relented at their groans under their oppressors. The words ‘groan’ and ‘oppressor’ echo the language of the bondage under the Pharaoh in Egypt.

But, once the judge was dead, the people fell back into even more corrupt ways than those who had gone before them. They gave themselves completely to other gods, served them, bowed down before them and totally abandoned the practices of their ancestors.

Although there were undoubtedly natural explanations for the people’s sufferings, the Scripture sees the hands of God in everything they experience. On their own or subject to false gods, they are lost and they experience great suffering. It is less a sign of God’s punishment, still less his vindictiveness, than the fact that to leave truth and goodness is to head for darkness and failure and pain.

Following the ways of God and Jesus is not just a question of obedience to a higher authority, it is to follow a way of life which is in total harmony with our deepest needs.

Matthew 19:16-22

We have here a story of a young man who did not have that simple trust of the child which Jesus spoke about in the immediately preceding passage. (Only Matthew describes him as ‘young’.)

He was apparently a good man, an unusually good man. He asks Jesus what he needs to do in order to have eternal life. However, he seemed to be operating out of the legalistic mind with the emphasis on external actions. For Jesus what we are is more important than what we do. The man also asked about ‘eternal life’. In Matthew (and in Mark and Luke) ‘eternal life’ is really synonymous with ‘entering the Kingdom of Heaven [God]’ and ‘being saved’. It is to be totally taken up into God’s world and sharing God’s understanding of life.

“Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus asks him.”There is One alone who is good.” This seems to be a way of telling the man that goodness is not something merely external. The real source of goodness is inside, although, of course, it will flow out to the exterior. Is it also a way of asking the man who he really thinks Jesus is?

In any case, the man is told, “If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.” As we have just said, to ‘enter into life’ is equivalent to entering the Kingdom. And Jesus mentions just four of the commandments, all touching on relationships with other people. And he adds, “Love your neighbour as yourself.”

The man is not satisfied.”I have kept all these. What more do I need to do?” Jesus tells him that if he wants to be perfect then he should sell off everything he has, give it to the poor and then become a disciple of Jesus.

Obviously, the man was not expecting this. He was very rich and, although he wanted to serve God, he was not prepared to separate himself from the security of his wealth. And he walked away from Jesus full of sadness. It is an example of Jesus’ words earlier on that we cannot at the same time serve God and wealth.

To be rich is not just to have a lot of money. It is to have a lot more money than others and especially to have more money than one needs in a world where there are people who do not have enough for a life of dignity. And wealth is very relative: a person close to the poverty line in Europe could be seen as very rich in a remote African or Asian village.

So as long as the man had to cling to his money, he could not - as he claimed to be doing - be loving his neighbour as his own self. Clearly he was not yet ready for an unconditional following of Jesus. He was not able to follow the example of Peter and Andrew, James and John who left their boats, nets and family to go and put all their security with Jesus.

Before we think that this gospel does not particularly concern us because we do not see ourselves as numbered among the rich, we should listen to what Jesus is really saying.

He touched on the one thing that the man was not ready to give up - his money and all that it brought. But, if we are honest, we will admit that we all have some things we would be very slow to let go of. Things we would not like God to ask us to give up.

It might be a good exercise today for us to ask ourselves what would be the most difficult thing for us to give up if Jesus asked us to do so. It might be some thing we own like our house, or it might be a relationship, or our job, or our health. Whatever it is, it could be coming between us and our total following of Jesus. Do the things we own really own us?

Why not ask for the strength to be ready, if called on, to give it up? Only then do we know that we are truly free and truly followers of Jesus.

One final point. This story has been used in the past as an example of someone getting a special ‘vocation’. According to this view, all are expected to keep the commandments but only some are invited to follow a ‘counsel’, such as living a life of ‘poverty’, as members of religious institutes do. It would be quite wrong to see Jesus here suggesting two levels of living the Christian life. What is said here applies to every person who wants to follow Christ. All the baptised are called to the same level of service although there are different ways of doing this.

Week 20 | Tuesday

Judges 6:11-24; Matthew 19:23-30

We read today of the call of Gideon, one of the ‘major’ judges or leaders of the people.

The story of Gideon is instructive of Israel’s condition at this time. The Hebrews had taken to agriculture and, like the other settled peoples, were threatened by nomads invading their territory to get food. To some extent they had adopted the worship of the Baalim, the local gods who guaranteed the annual yield of wheat and oil. A select few remained faithful to Yahweh.

The passage combines an account of the calling of Gideon and an account of the founding of a sanctuary, in the manner of those in Genesis, with a theophany (a divine appearance), a message of salvation and the inauguration of the cult

At the beginning of this section, we are told that, because the Israelites had done evil in Yahweh’s eyes, they had been subjected to the power of the Midianites for seven years. The Midianites were a nomadic people living in north-western Sinai. All efforts of the Israelites to support themselves by pasturing and farming were regularly pillaged by the Midianites. In their desperation the Israelites cried out to God for help.

And, once again, God intervened on their behalf.

As our reading opens, we are told that the Angel of Yahweh (further on referred to simply as ‘Yahweh’) came and sat under the terebinth tree at Ophrah, which belonged to a man called Joash of Abiezer. The Abiezrites were from the tribe of Manasseh, one of the tribes descended from Joseph. The terebinth was a sacred tree and the location of the Ophrah mentioned here is not certain. The Angel of Yahweh evidently appeared in human shape, which led to Gideon’s exclamation at the end of the passage.

Joash’s son, Gideon, was threshing wheat inside a wine-press, in order to remain hidden from the Midianites who might otherwise attack and take away the crop. Normally, threshing would take place in the open so that the wind could blow away the chaff but Gideon felt more secure threshing in this better protected but very confined space.

The Angel then greets Gideon with the words: “Yahweh is with you, valiant warrior!” By addressing him this way it would seem that Gideon belonged to the upper class, perhaps a kind of aristocracy, in spite of his disclaimer a little later on. He was more than a simple farmer.

Gideon’s response to the Angel’s greeting is immediate and to the point: “Excuse me, my Lord, but if Yahweh is with us, why are we going through this terrible suffering? Where are all the miracles that our ancestors used to tell us about when they spoke about Yahweh bringing them out of Egypt? Right now, Yahweh seems to have abandoned us to Midian.”

At this, Yahweh turns to him and, without challenging Gideon’s complaint, instead suggests Gideon himself do something about it. He gives Gideon a mission: “Go in this strength of yours, and you will rescue Israel from the power of Midian. Am I not sending you myself?”

Now, it is Yahweh who speaks and not just the ‘Angel of Yahweh’. We are dealing not just with a divine messenger but with an appearance of the Lord himself, a theophany. ‘Go. . . am I not sending you?’ - this is a commission to deliver Israel as Moses had been sent.

Gideon does not feel up to the challenge.”Forgive me, my Lord, but how can I deliver Israel?” He says his clan is the weakest in Manasseh and that he himself is the least of his father’s family. But, as so often, the Lord usually calls the lowly rather than the mighty to act for him (e. g. Jacob the younger chosen before Esau, see Gen 25:23; Saul, the least in the tribe of Benjamin; David, the shepherd in the field; and, of course, Mary, the ‘nobody’ from Nazareth).

But Yahweh promises to be with Gideon.”You will crush Midian as though it were just one person.”

Gideon then requests that, if he has found favour in Yahweh’s sight, he be given a sign to confirm that the words come from Yahweh himself. He asks Yahweh to stay where he is while Gideon goes off to bring back an offering. Gideon now realises that he is addressing someone very special. His request is similar to Moses asking for signs as assurance that Yahweh would be with him in his undertakings.”I will stay until you come back” is Yahweh’s promise.

Gideon then goes off. He prepares a young goat and an ephah of flour to make unleavened cakes. He puts the meat in a basket and the soup in a pot and brings them to the terebinth tree. Yahweh then tells him to put the meat and the cakes on a rock and to pour the soup over them. Gideon does this.

The offerings are carefully chosen - a kid, the most suitable sacrificial animal; a measure of flour; loaves unleavened, because otherwise ‘unclean’. All are placed on a rock, a primitive rite characteristic of peasants fresh from nomadic life.

Then (the Angel of) Yahweh touched the meat and the cakes with the staff he was carrying. Fire sprang from the rock and consumed the meat and cakes. The meal prepared by Gideon for the Angel of Yahweh - whether it has a sacrificial character or not - is turned into a burnt offering (holocaust) by the divine fire. There is a similar event, though more dramatically told, later on in Judges (13:15-20). The rock on which the offerings were placed becomes consecrated and Gideon builds an altar on it. The place becomes a sacred shrine.

Gideon then realises he has been speaking with the Angel of Yahweh and he exclaims: “Alas, my Lord Yahweh! I have seen the Angel of Yahweh face to face!” But Yahweh assures him: “Peace with you; have no fear. You will not die.” The traditional belief was that no one could look on the face of God and live. The great exception was Moses.

Gideon then builds an altar to Yahweh in that place and calls it Yahweh-Peace. The author says that the altar still stands at Ophrah of Abiezer. In fact, in our time no one knows where it was.

As we read this story we may remind ourselves that God, too, is constantly calling us. Our lack of talent or education or ability will never be an excuse. We can trust, too, that he is always on our side and we do not need extraordinary signs of his presence, although things may happen which will surprise us. He is, after all, the “God of surprises”.

Matthew 19:23-30

After hearing the sad story of the rich young man who could not accept his invitation to be a disciple, Jesus gives some comments on the effects of wealth. It is next to impossible for the rich man to enter the kingdom of God, says Jesus. It would be easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle. (It is said that Jesus was referring to a narrow entrance in the city wall of Jerusalem called the ‘eye of the needle’. In either case, Jesus is indicating something which is extremely difficult, in fact, next to impossible.)

Some of us may feel slightly uncomfortable about this. Even if we are not rich ourselves, we might like to see our children get rich some day or we admire people who have, by their hard work, become wealthy. What is wrong with having a lot of money which one has earned by the one’s own sweat and labour?

What does the Gospel mean by being rich? To be rich here means to have a large surplus of money and possessions while around one are people who do not have what they need to live a life of dignity. How can I continue to hold on to “my” possessions when such a situation prevails? How can I claim to belong to the kingdom, the reign of God, which is a kingdom of love and justice? “I was hungry and thirsty and sick and in prison” and you did not give me to eat or drink, you did not visit me or show any compassion. Instead, you piled up all that money in the bank or on the stock exchange or you splurged it on BMWs and fancy restaurants and expensive clothes.

To be rich in the Gospel means refusing to share what you have with those who have not. As long as you behave like that, you cannot be eligible for the Kingdom. It really is like trying to get a camel through the eye of a needle. There is a radical incompatibility.

The disciples were quite amazed at Jesus’ words. They were thinking along lines traditional to their culture and their religion. Wealth was a sign of God’s blessings; poverty and sickness a sign of his punishment. But Jesus is turning their traditions on their head.

It was something the young man could not understand either. He was under the impression that his wealth was a grace, a sign of God’s favour. The idea of giving alms was to be highly commended but to share his wealth with the poor and create a more just playing field was something for which he felt no obligation and which made no sense.

Then Peter, the optimist, begins to see the bright side.”What about us? We have left everything and followed you.” Jesus gives a twofold reply.

As the leaders of the new community and people who have generously put their whole security in Jesus, his disciples will be especially rewarded. And indeed everyone who leaves family and goods for Jesus’ sake will be rewarded many times over with father, mother, brothers, sisters, goods. This is not just a pie-in-the-sky promise. It is one that can be realised and, in many parts of the world, is being realised. When everyone works for the good of the other, everyone benefits.

The wealth-is-good world believes that it is every man for himself. There is only a limited amount of the cake and it is up to each one to get as big a piece as he can. Too bad about the losers.

In the world of Jesus, everyone gets because everyone gives; because everyone gives, everyone receives. It is not a ‘gimme’ world; it is a reaching out to others world. And when everyone reaches out, everyone is benefiting. In such a world, I do not have to worry about a roof over my head, or about brothers and sisters, or property or security. It is the realisation of “From each according to his ability; to each according to his need.” It is where love and justice meet. For too many people in our world, there is neither love nor justice.

If the rich man had liberated himself from his wealth and shared it with the poor and become a follower of Jesus in the new community, he might never have been rich again but he would have had all his needs attended to.

Week 20 | Wednesday

Judges 9:6-15; Matthew 20:16

Today we have a rather unusual reading. Gideon is now gone and, true to form, the people have relapsed once more into idolatry. Our reading is taken from a section of Judges dealing with the reign of Abimelech as king.

The story of Abimelech does not really belong in this book. The only reason is that he was the son of Gideon-Jerubbaal but he was not one of the judges nor even a king of Israel. He is presented as a highly disreputable character. He was the son of a Shechemite woman and was made king by the Canaanites of Shechem as the result of intrigue and a show of force on his part. His only exploits were the massacre of his brothers, his struggles with the rebels of Shechem and his assault on the Israelite town of Thebez, which ended ignominiously in his death.

The narrative is undoubtedly historical and throws light on conditions of the period, the 14 century BC. Abimelech’s failure served the author-editor’s belief that there could be no other king in Israel but one chosen by Yahweh. That would not happen until the appointment of Saul. As with Rome at a later period, there was a strong anti-king feeling among the Israelites and it is reflected in today’s reading.

As the reading opens we are told that all the leading men of Shechem and all Beth-Millo met and proclaimed Abimelech king at the oak of the cultic stone at Shechem. Shechem, as we saw before, is in the very middle of Palestine and at that time in the territory of Manasse. Beth-millo is probably the same as the Migdal-shechem mentioned later in the story (but not in our reading). ‘Millo’ is derived from a Hebrew verb meaning ‘to fill’ and probably refers to the earthen fill used to erect a platform on which walls and other large structures were built. Beth Millo then may mean ‘stronghold’ (cf. 9:46).

News of the proclamation was brought to Jotham, Abimelech’s youngest brother. He went and stood on the top of Mount Gerizim and shouted at the top of his voice. He was totally opposed to his brother becoming king and, after making his speech, he will take flight to be beyond Abimelech’s reach. Mount Gerizim will later be the mountain which, for the people of Samaria, will become the rival to the Temple in Jerusalem. It features in the dialogue which Jesus has with the Samaritan woman when she asks him which place is the right one in which to worship God (John 4:19ff).

What follows is known as Jotham’s fable. It is the earliest example in the Bible of a fable using plants or animals to point a human moral. Later examples include the fable that Nathan told to David to make him aware of his terrible combined sin of adultery and murder in connection with Bathsheba (2 Cam 12:1-4) or the fable of King Jehoash about a thistle proposing marriage to a Lebanon cedar (2 Kings 14:9). Ezekiel, too, uses a fable to speak of how Nebuchadnezzar deported King Jehoiachin and put Zedekiah on the throne instead.

As a literary form, it was found everywhere including Mesopotamia, Egypt and Greece. In Greece one thinks of the fables of Aesop, part of the literary lore of children up to our own day. The one that is told here may have existed independently and was adapted by Jotham to express his evaluation of Abimelech.

Jotham’s fable betrays a mistrust of the monarchy such as we find in the period just before the choice of Saul as Israel’s first king (1 Sam 8). So here, olive, fig and vine, trees of value for man, refuse kingship as serving no useful purpose. They represent Gideon, who refused be king or found a dynasty. The thornbush, fruitless and noxious, accepts it and represents Abimelech, a person entirely unsuited for the role.

The fable then follows:

“One day the trees went out to anoint a king to rule over them.” As we mentioned, fables of this type, in which inanimate objects speak and act, were popular among Eastern peoples of that time - and indeed in our own, though now they may be more likely to take the form of a Disney cartoon.

“They approached an olive tree, ‘Be our king!’

But the olive tree declined: ‘Must I forgo my oil, which gives honour to gods and men, just to stand and sway over the trees?’”

Oil was used in the worship both of the true God and of false gods; it was prescribed in the worship of Yahweh. It was also used to consecrate prophets, priests and kings. In speaking of Jesus as the ‘Christ’, we are speaking of an anointing with oil. Christos means ‘anointed’ and hence that he is a King. The Hebrew equivalent is ‘Messiah’. (In fact, Jesus was not anointed with oil but baptised with water by John the Baptist.)

“The trees then went to the fig tree, ‘Come and be our king!’

The fig tree replied, ‘Must I forgo my sweetness, forgo my excellent fruit, just to go and sway over the trees?’”

“Then the trees approached the vine, “You come and be our king!”

The vine also declined.”Must I forgo my wine, which cheers gods and men, to go and sway over the trees?”

Wine was used in the libations both of the Temple of Jerusalem and of pagan temples. But it was also commonly believed that the gods participated in such human experiences as drinking wine.

All in all, the olive tree, the fig tree and the vine were all plants which produced fruit of great importance to the people of the Near East. All are mentioned frequently in the Scriptures, including the Gospel.

“Lastly, the trees approached the thorn bush: ‘You come and be our king!’

The thorn bush replied:

‘If you are anointing me in good faith to be your king, come and shelter in my shade.

But, if not, fire will come out of the thorn bush and devour the cedars of Lebanon’.”

The cedar of Lebanon, the most valuable of all Near Eastern trees, is here symbolic of the leading men of Shechem who are being warned if they do not show their loyalty to Abimelech, whom they have made king.

The thornbush is probably the well-known buckthorn, a scraggly bush common in the hills of Palestine and a constant menace to farming. It produced nothing of value and was an apt figure for Abimelech. In offering shade to the trees, the thornbush symbolised the traditional role of kings as protectors of their subjects but there is an element of sarcasm in such a plant offering shade to other trees all much taller than itself. There seems to be an implication that the protection of kings, especially Abimelech, is no better than the thornbush.

Overall, the story reflects Israel’s distaste for monarchy at this time. It implies that the most valuable and productive people are not interested in being kings. Instead the role is taken by the utterly useless brambles (symbolic of Abimelech).

We too can sometimes avoid taking on responsibilities because we are reluctant to give up something we like doing. As a result, the task may have to be done by people who are incapable or unsuitable. On the other hand we may ambition some role for which we are not suited and which frustrates the use of the real gifts we have.

Discernment is often needed to discover whether we are really in the place that God wants us to be or whether we are making good use of the talents he has given us.

Matthew 20:1-16

Today we have another parable of the Kingdom. And it is not unrelated to the previous story of the rich man. At a first reading we might be strongly inclined to side with the grumblers in the parable. After all, it did not seem at all fair that those who only worked for one hour should get exactly the same as those who had worked from early in the morning and through the heat of the day.

Even though all had agreed to work for a stipulated amount, still in all fairness and decency, one feels that the early comers should have been given more or the late comers less. However, if we find ourselves talking like this then it shows that our thoughts are human thoughts and not God’s. A little further reflection will make us feel grateful that God works like the employer in the vineyard.

The story seems, as often happens in the Gospel, to reflect the situation of the early Church. The first Christians were all Jews. Before their conversion they had been trying to live according to the requirements of their Jewish faith. They belonged to a people who had thousands of years of religious history, they were God’s own people. Then Gentiles began to be admitted into the community. Some of these people probably came from totally pagan environments. They may have lived very immoral lives and yet, once accepted and baptised, they enjoyed all the privileges of the community. Somehow, it did not seem right.

But this is the justice of God which we need to learn. He gives his love, all of his love, to every person without exception who opens himself to it. It does not matter whether that happens early or late. One reason for that is that that love can never be earned, only accepted. And, as the previous story indicated, the genuine needs of all should be met. The fact that the late comers were only employed at the last hour does not make their needs any less than those who came earlier. God’s justice is measured by our needs not by mathematical divisions.

What each of the workers received was a symbol of the love of God, who is the vineyard owner. All - early arrivals and late comers - got exactly the same, the love of their Master and Lord. There are not various degrees of that love. It is always 100 percent. God is Love; he cannot not love and he cannot not love totally. He cannot and will not give more of that love to one than another.

This is indeed something we should be grateful for. Because it can happen - perhaps it has already happened - that I move away from God and his love. I may move very far. But I know that at whatever time I turn back to him, be it at the 11th hour, he is waiting with open arms.

Thank heavens for the justice of God!

Week 20 | Thursday

Judges 11:29-39; Matthew 22:1-14

If anyone was looking forward to the story of Samson and his betrayal by his girlfriend, Delilah, during our readings from the Book of Judges, they are going to be disappointed.

Our last reading from the book is, in many ways, a very disturbing one and one wonders why it was chosen. It reflects a rather primitive and superstitious society where life, especially that of women, comes cheap. It is a society, too, where - at least among the non-Hebrew religions - human sacrifice was not unknown.

The spirit of Yahweh was on Jephthah, who crossed Gilead and Manasseh, by way of Mizpah in Gilead into the territory of the Ammonites. Jephthah is one of the ‘lesser’ Judges. In the Old Testament the unique empowering of the Spirit was given to an individual primarily to enable him to carry out the special responsibilities God had given him.

He made a vow to Yahweh, “If you deliver the Ammonites into my grasp, the first thing to come out of the doors of my house to meet me when I return in triumph shall belong to Yahweh, and I shall sacrifice it as a burnt offering (holocaust).” What or who he expected to greet him is not certain but it would very likely be a human person.

Making vows was a common practice among the Israelites and they were not to be broken. While Jephthah clearly worships Yahweh he seems to share some of the thinking of his non-Hebrew contemporaries. The text clearly implies that Jephthah was prepared to vow a human sacrifice, according to the custom of his pagan neighbours. Human sacrifice was forbidden by the Law but made its way into Israel through Canaanite influence. The author merely records the fact but was not likely to have approved the action.

Jephthah did enter the Ammonite territory and was victorious.”It was a very severe defeat, and the Ammonites were humbled by the Israelites.”

As he returned to his house at Mizpah, his daughter came out to meet him, dancing to the music of tambourines. It was customary for women to greet armies returning victoriously from battle in this way. So Miriam, the sister of Moses, together with the other women danced and played tambourines to celebrate the defeat of the Egyptians in the Sea of Reeds (Exod 15:20). Similarly when David came back after defeating the Philistines (1 Sam 18:6).

Now this girl was Jepthtah’s only child - he had no other son or daughter. On seeing her, he tore his clothes and cried out: “Oh my daughter, what misery you have brought on me! You have joined those who bring misery into my life! I have a promise to Yahweh which I cannot retract.”

Tearing the clothes was a common practice for expressing extreme grief. His vow, too, even in this situation he sees as irrevocable.

The daughter replied with extraordinary equanimity: “Father, you have made a promise to Yahweh. Treat me as the promise you have made requires, since Yahweh has granted you vengeance on your enemies, the Ammonites.” She puts her life on a lower level than his vow and his military victory. We need, of course, to remember that in such societies, the individual counted for very little as would also be the case in Communist societies in much later times.

She then made a request to her father: “Let me be free for two months. I shall go and wander in the mountains, and with my companions bewail my virginity.” In other words, that she will never be a mother. To be childless was considered a misfortune and, for a woman, a disgrace. A man married a woman for the primary purpose of having children, especially sons. And a woman existed to become the mother of children, preferably sons. To be kept from marrying and rearing children was a bitter prospect for an Israelite girl. Hence Jephthah’s daughter now asks permission to spend two months mourning the fact that she will be put to death before she can bear children. The very reason of her existence is to be denied.

The father granted his daughter’s request. And, when the two months were over she went back to her father and - as the reading euphemistically expresses it - he treated her as the vow had required him to do. In other words, she was burnt to death as a sacrificial victim.

The words of the next sentence (not in our reading) are poignant: “She had remained a virgin.” In the case of many Christian and Hebrew martyrs this was often a matter of glory but here it is full of pain and tragedy. Jephthah’s daughter never became a mother. And perhaps there is in this comment a criticism of the whole story by the author. There was probably no greater contribution that could be made for the nation of Israel than to produce sons for it. That contribution had been denied here.

The story of Jephthah’s vow was apparently intended to explain an annual festival celebrated in Gilead, the real significance of which was unknown. It was observed by the daughters of Israel each year over a period of four days going to mourn the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite.

In plain terms, Jephthah immolates his daughter rather than break the vow he has made. Human sacrifice was always regarded with abhorrence in Israel. This is expressed in the scene where Abraham is prevented by God from sacrificing his son Isaac (Gen 22), but this story is told without any expression of blame, the emphasis apparently falling on the importance of fulfilling a vow once made.

In the Gospel, Jesus during the Sermon on the Mount, teaches us not to make any vows or oaths of this kind. The disciple of Christ will be a person of such transparent integrity and reliability that his ‘Yes’ always means ‘Yes’ and his ‘No’ always means ‘No’. With such a person, a Jephthah situation will never arise.

Matthew 22:1-14

In our readings we have jumped from chapter 20 to chapter 22 and read another Kingdom parable not unrelated to yesterday’s about the workers in the vineyard.

Yesterday it was a question of resentment at God’s generosity to late comers in his kingdom. Today it is rather sadness over the Jewish leaders’ refusal to accept Jesus as Messiah and Lord. The parable is a kind of potted history and is more like an allegory than a parable.

The king (God) gives a wedding banquet (the happiness of the Messianic age) for his son (Jesus the Messiah). But when he invites people (the Jews) to attend, they refuse to come and make all kinds of excuses. Others actually attack the king’s servants and messengers (the prophets and the early Christian evangelisers).

The king becomes angry and “sent his army to destroy those murderers and burn their city”. Surely a reference to the Roman army under the emperor Titus which sacked and destroyed Jerusalem in AD 70. The Temple, the heart of Judaism, was also destroyed and plundered and has never since been rebuilt. Today an Islamic mosque stands on the site.

Because the invited guests will not come, the servants (the Jewish disciples of Jesus) are instructed to go out and bring in anyone they can find.”They rounded up everyone they met, bad as well as good.” All are called - both the good and sinful.

The climax of the story at first seems somewhat unfair. People have been pulled in from highways and byways and now one is condemned for not wearing a wedding garment! But the parable has in fact moved to the final judgement. In fact, Matthew may be combining what were two original parables into one.

The wedding garment clearly stands for faith and baptism combined with a lived out commitment to the Gospel, something necessary to be accepted into the eternal happiness of the Kingdom.

As Jesus says at the end, “Many are called, but few are chosen.” Many were called and invited to attend the banquet. But more than that was expected of them. They had to answer the call by saying an unqualified Yes to Jesus. Being baptised and having the label ‘Christian’ or ‘Catholic’ is not enough.

We have also to live out in our lives and relationships what we claim to believe in.

Week 20 | Friday

Ruth 1:1,3-6,14-16,22; Matthew 22:34-40

We move on today to a very different piece of Scripture, the short book of Ruth, which consists of just four chapters. (The only other biblical book bearing the name of a woman is Esther.) We will just have two readings from this lovely work which follows immediately on Judges.

The Jerusalem Bible comments:

Although its action is placed in the period of the Judges (Ruth 1:1) the book does not form part of the deuteronomic corpus which runs from Joshua to the end of Kings. . .

The main purpose of the book is to show (2:12), how trust in God is rewarded and how God’s goodness is not restricted by frontiers. That a woman of Moab should be privileged to become the great-grandmother of David gives a particular value to this narrative; nor is there any reason to doubt its historical foundation.

And the New International Version Study Bible:

The story is set in the time of the Judges, a time characterised in the book of Judges as a period of religious and moral degeneracy, national disunity and general foreign oppression. The book of Ruth reflects a temporary time of peace between Israel and Moab (contrast Judges 3:12-30). Like 1 Sam 1-2, it gives a series of intimate glimpses in the private lives of the members of an Israelite family. It also presents a delightful account of the remnant of true faith and piety in the period of the Judges, relieving an otherwise wholly dark picture of that era.

The book - and our reading today - tells the sad story of Elimelech, a man from Bethlehem in Judah. It was the days of the Judges and the area was hit by a famine. Because of this, he had to move to Moab with his wife, Naomi, and his two sons, Mahlon and Chilion. There they settled. Bethlehem lies south of Jerusalem while Moab was a tribal region on the east side of the Dead Sea and hence Gentile territory.

The time of the Judges was probably from around 1380 BC to about 1050 BC. By setting such an edifying story in this period, the author calls to mind a time in Israel’s history noted for its apostasy, moral degradation and oppression. The famine mentioned here is not recorded in Judges. Bethlehem in Judah will be David’s hometown and, as descendants of David, Joseph and Mary will go to Bethlehem to be registered (cf. Luke 2:4). Bethlehem means the ‘house of bread’ but right now there is no bread there.

The names are not those of real people and have been chosen mainly for their meaning. Emilech means ‘my God is king’, while Naomi is ‘my fair one’. The two sons, who die relatively young, are called Mahlon (‘sickness’) and Chilion (‘pining away’). Their two wives are called Orpah (‘she who turns away’) and Ruth (‘the beloved’). Naomi and Ruth are the two ‘lovely’ people in the story. It reminds one of the names given to the characters in John Bunyah’s Pilgrim’s Progress. This Ruth, too, is one of the four women listed in Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus. The others are Tamar, Rahab and Bathsheba (Matt 1:3,5-6).

After they moved to Moab, Elimelech died, leaving Naomi a widow with her two sons. This is the first blow. Each of her sons married local Moabite women, Orpah and Ruth, and the prospect of continuing the family line remained.

The Moabites were descended from Moab, who was the son of a liaison between Lot and one of his daughters (Gen 19:36-37). (Both his daughters slept with him while he was too drunk to know what was happening.) Marriage with Moabite women was not forbidden to Hebrews, though no Moabite - or his sons to the 10th generation - was allowed to “enter the assembly of the Lord” (Deut 23:3).

Then, after about 10 years, both the sons died. Naomi, a widow, was now left without her husband or her sons. Nor did her daughters-in-law have any sons to support them. Naomi’s emptiness is complete. She has neither husband nor sons. She has only two young daughters-in-law, both of them foreigners and both childless.

It was a complete ‘kenosis’ or ‘emptying’. In those times, the lot of the widow could be a very sad one with no means of support and little chance of remarriage. All three women had become outsiders and rejects: of no more interest to their husband’s family and a disappointment to their own.

Naomi then decided to leave the Plains of Moab and return to Bethlehem with her two daughters-in-law, having heard that God had visited his people and the famine was over. The ‘visit’ here is a way of expressing God’s blessing and favour on the place. It is just one point in the story where God’s control of events is recognised. Bethlehem, the house of bread, now has bread once more. There seems to be a mutual echoing between the famine in Bethlehem and the emptiness of Naomi and her daughters-in-law. The end of the famine foreshadows the end of the emptiness.

So, together they all left the place and set out for Judah, Naomi’s homeland. However, on the way, she urged the two daughters-in-law to go back to their homeland. They had a better chance of finding husbands there than in Judah but they were reluctant to leave her. Then, with many tears, Orpah agreed to go back to her native place but Ruth insisted on staying with Naomi, one outsider offering to take care of another. While Orpah left reluctantly and only after the urging of Naomi, her departure highlights the loyalty and selfless devotion of Ruth to her desolate mother-in-law.

Naomi still urged Ruth to go back with her sister to her own people and her gods. (The chief god of the Moabites was Chemosh.) But Ruth asked Naomi not to force her to leave or to prevent her staying with Naomi. She will accompany her mother-in-law into a future that shows no promise for either of them.

She expresses her feelings beautifully, in poetic form:

Wherever you go, I shall go,
wherever you live, I shall live.
Your people will be my people,
and your God will be my God.

Whereas Orpah returns to Moab and its god Chemosh, Ruth chooses Yahweh’s territory and his people; in doing so she will have no other God but him.

Ruth is now doubly an outsider: she does not belong to the family of Naomi’s husband and she is a Gentile Moabite who has left her native land. It is this loyalty to her husband’s mother, a loyalty that was not expected and which transcended tribal and religious boundaries, which is one of the qualities for which Ruth is admired as a specially good woman. Indeed, very much a person for our time.

She also anticipates the Gospel teaching that, before God, there are no outsiders.

And so, the author tells us, that was how Naomi returned home to Bethlehem with her daughter-in-law Ruth the Moabitess from the Plains of Moab. The author keeps reminding the reading the reader that Ruth is a foreigner from a despised people.

“They arrived in Bethlehem at the beginning of the barley harvest.” Naomi and Ruth arrive in Bethlehem just as the renewed fullness of the land is beginning to be harvested - an early hint that Naomi’s emptiness will be ended and she will be filled with joy again. Reference to the barley harvest also prepares the reader for the next major scene in the harvest fields.

Harvesting grain in ancient Canaan took place in April and May (barley first, wheat a few weeks later). It involved the following steps: 1, cutting the ripened standing grain with hand sickles - usually done by men; 2, binding the grain into sheaves - usually done by women; 3, gleaning, i. e. gathering stalks of grain left behind; 4, transporting the sheaves to the threshing floor - often by donkey, sometimes by cart; 5, threshing, i. e. loosening the grain from the straw - usually done by the treading of cattle, but sometimes by toothed threshing sledges or the wheels of carts; 6, winnowing - done by tossing the grain into the air with winnowing forks so that the wind, which usually came up for a few hours in the afternoon, blew away the straw and chaff, leaving the grain at the winnower’s feet; 7, sifting the grain to remove any residual foreign matter; 8, bagging for transportation and storage. Threshing floors, where both threshing and winnowing occurred, were hard, smooth, open places, prepared on either rock or clay and carefully chosen for favourable exposure to the prevailing winds. They were usually on the east side - i. e. , downwind - of the village. (NIV, edited)

One of the special significances of this story for us is that Ruth is the great-grandmother of King David, who was from Bethlehem, and hence also an ancestor of Jesus. As mentioned, Ruth is one of the four women mentioned by Matthew in the family tree of Jesus.

Matthew 22:34-40

Matthew’s gospel is building up to its climax. The continued confrontation between Jesus and the religious leaders is leading to the final showdown. It had been described symbolically in the parable we heard yesterday.

This parable is followed in Matthew by three encounters where Jesus’ opponents try to wrongfoot him by showing him to be in opposition to the Law. There is the famous scene where he is asked whether it is right to pay tribute to Caesar or not. The question is put in such a way that, no matter what answer he gives, he will say the wrong thing. This is followed by the Saduccees, who did not believe in the after life, bringing up what they thought was an insoluble problem for those who did believe in the resurrection of the dead.

In both cases, Jesus dealt expeditiously with his questioners and left them with no comeback.

Today we read of a third encounter. The Pharisees, who were very pleased that the Sadducees had been silenced by Jesus, now had their own challenge for him.”Which is the greatest commandment of the Law?” they asked him. This was a much-discussed question among the experts. There were more than 600 laws and it was common to ask which ones were of greater importance than others.

Jesus responds very quickly, not by using his own words but quoting from the Books of the Law themselves. And his answer contains not one but two laws:

a. You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul. This is from Deuteronomy 6:5, and

b. You must love your neighbour as yourself. This is from Leviticus 19:18.

They both have the word ‘love’ in common. It is important to be aware that the word translated ‘love’ here is the verb agapeo, from which we get agape and not phileo. Agape can be described as an intense desire for the good or the well-being of the other. Philia, on the other hand, implies friendship and affection. We are not asked to have affection for each other, only to work for the good of the other, no matter what that person is like.

And, from the Gospel (e. g. Matthew 25) we know that not only are these two commandments similar, they are complementary and inseparable. In other words, it is not possible to love God and not love the neighbour and vice versa.

So Jesus is, strictly speaking, answering their question about the “greatest commandment” (singular). The greatest commandment is simultaneously to love God and neighbour. And, in Luke’s gospel, the identity of the “neighbour” will be clearly shown, although it is also in fact clearly indicated later in Matthew 25 (“I was hungry, thirsty. . . As often as you did it to the least. . . you did it to me”).

On these two commandments, says Jesus, “hang the whole Law and the Prophets also”, in other words, the whole of the Old Testament teaching. The Law was contained in the Pentateuch, the first five books of our Bible; the Prophets included both the major prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel) but also the twelve minor prophets as well as the so-called ‘former’ prophets - Joshua, Judges, Samuel and Kings. Also included were the Writings, the Wisdom books.

And Jesus is saying that as long as one is truly loving God and the neighbour, the rest of the Law will take care of itself. And there may even be times when such love will transcend and override the requirements of some laws. No truly loving act can ever be sinful.

Week 20 | Saturday

Ruth 2:1-3,8-11; 4:13-17; Matthew 23:1-12

Our second and final reading from Ruth describes the outcome of the goodness and loyalty of this widowed and childless outsider to Naomi, her widowed mother-in-law.

There is a combination of pure coincidence and God’s over-riding Providence in the unfolding of the story. God is ultimately behind everything that happens to us.

First we are told that in Bethlehem Naomi had a kinsman, called Boaz, who was related to her deceased husband, Elimelech. And he was well off. ‘Boaz’ probably means “in him is strength”. Boaz is included in both genealogies of Jesus (Matt 1:5; Luke 3:32).

One day, Ruth asked Naomi for permission to go and glean ears of corn in the footsteps of a man who would allow her to do so. As a foreigner and a young woman on her own, she could be quite vulnerable in the harvest fields. Nevertheless, she is willing to take the risk in order to provide for her mother-in-law, who has no other resources. Later, Naomi will return the favour by putting Ruth cleverly in the way of her future husband (Ruth 3:1ff). Naomi gave her blessing for Ruth’s request.

According to the Law the poor had this right but its exercise depended on the goodwill of the owner of the property. The law of Moses instructed landowners to leave what the harvesters missed so that the poor, the alien, the widow and the orphan could glean for their needs. Gleaning was a work which was normally done by women. It was also a way for the landless poor to pick up any grain that got left behind. (When the Pharisees accused Jesus’ disciples for picking ears of wheat, it was not because they were stealing but because they were doing it on a Sabbath.)

So Ruth set out to glean in the fields behind the reapers. As chance would have it, she was led to a piece of land belonging to a man called Boaz, who was of the same clan as Emilech, Naomi’s late husband. It looked like chance but divine providence was also at work.

(At this point we add in material from some omitted verses for a fuller understanding of the passage.)

Again, apparently by chance, Boaz himself arrived just then and greeted the reapers. And, seeing Ruth, he asked a servant to whom this woman belonged. In the east every woman ‘belongs’ to someone, father, husband, brother, master. He is told that she is the Moabitess woman who came back from Moab with Naomi. She had asked for permission to glean what the reapers left behind and the servant says that she has been working non-stop from dawn till now.

(We now resume today’s reading.)

Boaz speaks to Ruth and tells her to continue gleaning in his field and not to go anywhere else. She is to stay close to Boaz’s other work women and to work close behind them. Boaz’s men have been forbidden to molest her in any way. It was customary for the men to cut the grain and for the servant girls to go behind them to bind the grain into sheaves. Then Ruth could glean what they had left behind. Furthermore, Boaz tells her that, if she is thirsty, she can get water from the pitchers the servants have prepared.

Ruth then falls prostrate before Boaz.”How have I attracted your favour, for you notice me, who am only a foreigner?” She is surprised at his kindness. In the eyes of many, perhaps most, Ruth would be the lowest of the low - an unknown person, a foreigner and a widow.

But Boaz tells her that he knows her story, how good she has been to her mother-in-law since her own husband’s death and how she has left her own parents and her native land to come and live among a people of whom she previously knew nothing. Ruth’s commitment to care for her desolate mother-in-law remains the centre of attention throughout the book.

We now move to the end of Ruth’s story and also of the book.

The conclusion of the story balances the introduction (1:1-5). 1, In the Hebrew both have the same number of words; 2, both compress much into a short space; 3, both focus on Naomi; 4, the introduction emphasised Naomi’s emptiness, and the conclusion portrays her fullness.

Boaz has now decided to make Ruth his wife. In doing so, he is also honouring the memory of his kinsman, Emilech. By marrying his kinsman’s widow he ensures that Emilech’s line will continue through him. And, when Boaz came together as man and wife, Yahweh was instrumental in their having a son.

And the women said to Naomi, “Blessed be Yahweh who has not left you today without anyone to redeem you. . . The child will be a comfort to you and the prop of your old age, for he has been born to the daughter-in-law who loves you and is more to you than seven sons.” The baby son is seen as a redeemer for Naomi, who now knows that she will be cared for in her old age. Even in our own day, this is a major concern for parents who do not have social welfare to take care of their old age. Only a son can do it; a daughter will be lost by marrying into another family.

‘Better than seven sons’. Since seven was considered a number of completeness, to have seven sons was the epitome of all family blessings in Israel. Ruth’s selfless devotion to Naomi receives its supreme accolade in this statement. There could be no higher praise.

Then Naomi took the child, held him to her breast and it was she who looked after him. Such an action was understood as an adoption ritual, also used by other peoples in the ancient Near East. The barrenness and emptiness of Naomi is at an end. The son is almost as much hers as it is Ruth’s.

In fact, Ruth, being the outsider, the child is spoken of as the grandson of Naomi. Naomi is the child’s legal mother just as Elimelech is his legal father. Through Ruth, the aged Naomi, who can no longer bear children, obtains an heir in place of her son, Mahlon.

And it was the women of the neighbourhood who gave the child its name - Obed. ‘Obed’ means ‘servant’, i. e. , of Yahweh. He will be the father of Jesse, who in turn will be the father of David.

The dutifulness of Ruth and Boaz thus makes Naomi the ancestress of King David. But there is another point of universal interest: it is a foreigner, Ruth, who is also the ancestress of David and through him of Christ. The gospel will call attention to this. In fact, in his genealogy of Jesus, Matthew will mention Boaz and Ruth as ancestors but not Naomi.

Through Ruth’s ‘alien’ blood, the House of David is linked to peoples outside that of Israel. Jesus will be the King of the new Israel, which will embrace peoples of all kinds. His Gospel will be for “all nations”.

Matthew 23:1-12

We begin today chapter 23 of Matthew which consists of a severe indictment of the Pharisees and Scribes by Jesus. This is not to be taken as a blanket condemnation of every individual Pharisee and Scribe, because we know that many of them were good people. One outstanding example is Gamaliel who appears in the Acts of the Apostles as a man of justice and integrity. Nicodemus, who came to Jesus by night and was involved in Jesus’ burial, was also a Pharisee.

The passage certainly reflects some of the conflicts which arose between the early Christians (especially those who were Jews themselves) and those Jews who were opposed to the Christian Way, who saw it as a heresy and who often subjected the Christians to verbal and even physical attacks and harassment.

What Jesus is attacking is not so much a particular people as certain attitudes of mind. And these attitudes can be found just as easily within the Christian community of that time and every period since then. We should listen to Jesus’ words, then, directed not so much to abstract “Pharisees and Scribes” but to ourselves. It is for our benefit and reflection that they have been included in the Gospel. The Gospel is written for us and to us; it is not a historical diatribe against certain people in the past.

Jesus first of all emphasises that as people in authority and experts on the subject, the Scribes and Pharisees should be listened to with respect and they should be obeyed when they teach. But Jesus says that in their behaviour their example should not be followed.”Their words are bold but their deeds are few.”

They have no hesitation in drawing up rules which are difficult for people to carry out but they do absolutely nothing to help in their implementation. The Church has not always been without guilt in this kind of thing, even in our own day. Nor have civil legislators or other people in authority, including parents of families or teachers in schools, been without fault.

This is the double standard, where people set the rules which they themselves do not keep: “Do as I say, not as I do” or “You will do it because I tell you to do it.”

Secondly, the Pharisees are attacked because everything they do is to attract attention to themselves. But it is all on the outside. What we call today ‘image’. Their phylacteries were bigger than others’ and their tassels huge. The phylactery was a small box containing some of the central words of the Law. It was worn on the arm or the forehead, a literal interpretation of the exhortation in Exodus (13:9), “[the Law] shall be as a sign on your hand and as a reminder on your forehead”. There were four tassels, sewn at each corner of one’s cloak.

The message is clear: “We are better, we are holier.” But it is a sham because it is all on the outside. But when it comes to ‘image’ our contemporary world has nothing to learn from the past.

They also expect special attention to be given to them: the first row in the synagogue, places of honour at banquets, special honorific titles. Sad to say, we have seen this not infrequently among church clerics in our own lifetime. We see it daily among our politicians, business leaders, our media personalities. They are not only given these things; they soon expect them as a right. It is the VIP syndrome and often it is pathetic: the private jet, the executive lounge in the airport, the special table in the restaurant, the limousine from the hotel. . .

Even ordinary people become slaves of the image: the brand label on the clothes they wear, the places where they live, the cars they drive, and all the other consumer baubles with which they surround themselves. None of these things, says Jesus, makes a person great.

The greatest is the one who serves, that is, the person who uses his or her gifts for the benefit of others, whose whole life is dedicated to making this world a better place for others to live in. A person to whom such trappings are totally irrelevant.

Week 21 | Monday

1 Thessalonians 1:2-5,8-10; Matthew 23:13-22

We have been reading from the Old Testament for the past nine weeks. We began with the 12th chapter of the book of Genesis and went through selected passages from each of the first eight books of the Bible in order: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges and Ruth.

Today we go back to the New Testament and we begin with readings from the first letter of Paul to the Christians of Thessalonika, in Macedonia, northern Greece. The letters of Paul (and those attributed to him) are not presented in our New Testament in the order in which they were written. They have been listed according to their length, so the letter to the Romans, being the longest, is placed first and the short letter to Philemon is last.

The first letter to the Thessalonians, although well down the list, is actually the earliest letter of Paul’s that we have. It seems to have been written from the city of Corinth, in Achaia, in southern Greece. It was written about the year 51 AD or just a little over 20 years after the death and resurrection of Jesus. This makes it also the earliest of the 27 books of the whole New Testament. It was written, as were all the Pauline letters, well before the first gospel. This makes it a work of considerable significance.

Twenty years, in many ways, was a much shorter period in those days than now because society changed much more slowly and, in a 20-year period, would hardly have changed at all. Nevertheless, as we read through this letter we see how well developed the Christian message already is. The ideas contained here were, for the Christians who read them, part of the Gospel message, i. e. the Good News about God which came to us through Jesus Christ. Note that Paul uses the word “gospel” (euangelion, Good News) in today’s passage, although Mark, Matthew, Luke and John - as we know them - would not begin to appear for another 20 years.

The New International Version Study Bible gives this introduction to Thessalonica:

Thessalonica was a bustling seaport city at the head of the Thermaic Gulf. It was an important communication and trade centre, located at the junction of the great Egnatian Way and the road leading north to the Danube. Its population numbered about 200,000, making it the largest city in Macedonia. It was also the capital of its province. The background of the Thessalonian church is found in Acts 17:1-9. Since Paul began his ministry there in the Jewish synagogue, it is reasonable to assume that the new church included some Jews. However, 1:9-10 and Acts 17:4 seem to indicate that the church was largely Gentile in membership. . .

Paul’s purpose in writing this letter was to encourage the new converts in their trials (3:3-5), to give instruction concerning godly living (4:1-8), to urge some not to neglect daily work (4:11-12) and to give assurance concerning the future of believers who die before Christ returns. . . The subject of eschatology seems to be predominant in both Thessalonian letters. Every chapter of 1 Thessalonians ends with a reference to the Second Coming of Christ, with chap 4 giving it major consideration. . . The two letters are often designated as the eschatological letters of Paul. (edited)

Today’s reading may be summarised as follows:

Paul expresses his satisfaction that the three principal Christian characteristics - faith, hope and love - are at work in the Thessalonian community.

Unhesitatingly, he places its members among those specially beloved and chosen by God. He recalls that his preaching of the Gospel to them was not received as a mere intellectual exercise but had made a strong actual impact on their lives which not even the opposition of unbelievers could dispel. Their faith has been an inspiration to Christians elsewhere, who have been impressed especially by the Thessalonians’ complete abandonment of idolatry for the worship of the true God, and by their profound orientation toward the Second Coming of Jesus. (New American Bible)

The letter begins, as usual, with greetings from Paul - together with Silvanus and Timothy - to the local Christians for whom he is writing. He assures the Thessalonians that they are constantly in his prayers and those of his companions.

There then comes a typical Pauline blessing: “We remember before our God and Father how active is the faith, how unsparing the love, how persevering the hope which you have from our Lord Jesus Christ.” In this relatively short sentence the very core of Christianity is expressed. We see the centrality of the Trinitarian relationship between the Father and Christ and the Spirit, as well as the vital elements of faith, hope and love. This triad of faith, hope and love is found frequently throughout the New Testament.

- Real faith results in action.”What good is it to profess faith without practicing it?. . . Faith without works is as dead as a body without breath” (James 2:14,26).

- Christian hope is not mere wishful thinking but firm confidence in Jesus Christ and his promises of a life that never ends.”I am the Way, I am Truth and Life.”

- Unsparing love imitates that of Jesus, who said that the greatest love anyone could show was to give one’s life for one’s friends.

“We know, brothers loved by God, that you have been chosen, because our gospel came to you not only in words, but also in the power and in the Holy Spirit and with great effect.” He addresses them as “brothers loved by God”. They are all united to each other as children of one Father and brothers and sisters of his Son. The term ‘brothers’ is used by Paul 28 times in the two Thessalonian letters.

“Our gospel”, that is, the gospel proclaimed by Paul, Silas and Timothy, a gospel they themselves had received by faith and passed on. It ultimately comes from God the Father and then through Christ to his followers and beyond. It is not mere hollow-sounding words. It is filled with power and, once assimilated, can have a transforming effect on one’s whole life. This has been its effect on the Thessalonian Christians.

And anyone who proclaims the Christian message through the words of Scripture knows that there is a power there that goes far beyond any human eloquence.

And “you observed the sort of life we lived when we were with you, which was for your sake”. The example of Paul’s own life and that of his companions was a kind of living gospel, which also had its influence on them. And they lived this life, not to draw attention to themselves but to lead the Christians to the following of Jesus’ Way.”Your light must shine before others so that they may see the goodness in your acts and give praise to your heavenly Father” (Matt 5:16).

Paul then congratulates the Thessalonians on the quality of their faith whose reputation has spread far and wide not only to Macedonia, of which Thessalonika is the capital, and to Achaia in the south where Corinth was situated, but everywhere.”It was from you that the word of the Lord rang out.” So effective has been their influence that Paul has hardly to speak about it himself.

One reason why the Thessalonian example became so widespread was because the city lay on the important Egnatian Way (Via Egnatiana). Apart from that, it was a busy seaport and the capital of the Roman province of Macedonia.

People in other places are telling Paul about how he began his work with the Thessalonians, how they turned away from false gods and came to serve the living and true God and are now waiting for the return of Jesus, his Son. Here we have three marks of true conversion: 1, turning from idols (of all kinds); 2, serving God; and 3, waiting for Christ to return.

In his two short letters to the Thessalonians, Paul speaks much of the second coming of Christ. In this early period of Christianity, this was a major preoccupation for Christians. As the years passed and there was no sign of the Second Coming and people were dying off before it happened, the conviction of an imminent coming waned and the focus switched to spending a long life in the service of the Gospel.

Right now, though, they are waiting for the One who will save them from the Retribution, the Day of Reckoning, that is to come. We have in these last two sentences of the reading two main elements of the Good News as preached by Paul: a vigorous stress emphasis on monotheism and a Christology stressing the coming of the Risen Lord.

We might ask ourselves, if Paul was writing to the Christian community in which we live - our diocese or our parish - what do we think he might want to say by way of praise or criticism?

What should we be developing further and what should we be correcting or abandoning? And how much of what he might say could apply to me personally?

GOSPEL (Matthew 23:13-22)

We continue with the attack of Jesus on the mentality of the Scribes and Pharisees, keeping in mind as we mentioned last Saturday that, first, we are dealing more with a state of mind than a blanket condemnation of a whole group of people, and, secondly, that the words are mainly to be heard as providing reflection for our own Christian communities and the way we behave.

Today and for the following two days we read of the seven ‘Woes’ that Jesus hurls against corrupt religious leaders. We have seen already how the number seven is a favourite of Matthew.

The Seven Woes are:

1. You shut up the kingdom of heaven in people’s faces. . . (v. 13)

[You devour the property of widows. . . (a verse not included in some texts). (v. 14)]

2. You travel over land and sea to make a single convert. . . (v. 15)

3. You say, if a man swears by the Temple it has no force. . . (vv. 16-22)

4. You pay your tithe of mint and dill. . . (vv. 23-24)

5. You clean the outside of cup and dish. . . (vv. 25-26)

6. You are like whitewashed tombs. . . (vv. 27-28)

7. You build the sepulchres of the prophets. . . (vv. 29-32)

Today we read the first three Woes.

1, You shut up the Kingdom of Heaven in people’s faces. . . v. 13

[You devour the property of widows. . . (not included in some texts). (v. 14)]

Jesus accuses the leaders of closing the entrance to the Kingdom, preventing others from going in and not going in themselves either. On the one hand, this can be a reference to their rejection of Jesus who was himself the embodiment of the Kingdom, was preaching the Kingdom and who, by his presence, had made the Kingdom accessible to all who came to him. On the other, it can also mean that they made the observance of the Law impossibly difficult by their complex interpretations of what was and was not allowed.

Whether we are parents, or teachers, or priests or religious, we can also by our behaviour both block people’s access to Jesus and be far from him ourselves also.

Included here is verse 14, left out of some texts, where Jesus accuses the Pharisees of saying long prayers but not hesitating to take money (for the Temple, of course) from widows, the poorest of the poor. Considering that widows were among the most destitute and insecure of people in Jewish society, this was exploitation of the most base kind. A comparison in our own day would be with the ways in which some “televangelists” have been known to rake in money from poor and gullible people who should be receiving rather than giving.

2, You travel over land and sea to make a single convert. . . (v. 15)

While they try to prevent people approaching Jesus, they themselves zealously go to great lengths to make even a single convert, only to make that person even worse than themselves. They do this by corrupting them with false ideas of what true religion is. They fill them ideas about ritual purification and thus create a false sense of security about what really brings about salvation. At this time Jewish proselytisation was very active in the Greek and Roman world. Parallels can be found in our own days among Christian groups.

3, You say, if a man swears by the Temple it has no force. . . (vv. 16-22)

Here Jesus’ attack is directed at the leaders’ greed and their corruption of religion for material gain. They persuade people to swear by the gold of the temple and make them pay. People are told not to swear by the altar but by the gift they have put there. Which is more holy, Jesus asks, the temple or the gold which the temple makes holy, the altar or the gift which the altar sanctifies? Again, in the name of holiness, the Pharisee-types are exploiting the poor.

Daily we see the abuse of authority and power, whether in the Church, in government, in business leading to all kinds of greed and corruption which undermines the very fabric of societies. Positions of service are turned into instruments of personal gain, often at the expense of the weakest and the most needy. Countries which long ago should have become rich and prosperous and provided with a high quality of life for their people are bankrupt, in every sense of the word, while a small elite live lives of shameless luxury.

The Church, too, can find itself over-concerned with matters of money at the expense of its pastoral mission. A diocese, a parish, a bishop or priest who is rich in a world of poverty and need is a major stumbling block to the hearing of the Gospel.

Week 21 | Tuesday

1 Thessalonians 2:1-8; Matthew 23:23-26

Although Paul in yesterday’s reading praised the Thessalonians for the depth of their faith whose reputation had spread far and wide, he recalls today some of the difficulties he faced at first in bringing the Gospel message to the city. Paul had experienced such great opposition in Thessalonica that he and Silas had to be secretly escorted from the city (Acts 17:1-10). This came on top of the humiliating experiences he had in Philippi where he and Silas were, as a result of false accusations, arrested, flogged and thrown into prison (from which they were rescued by an earthquake!).

It is probably the memory of these experiences which underlies his words today recalling his selflessness in preaching the gospel to them, his affection for them, and the pleasant relationships he has with them now.

He begins by saying that they themselves know his visit to the Thessalonians has not been without effect. The local church could refute accusations of insincerity which seem to have been had been levelled against Paul by certain hostile elements.

In spite of the terrible abuse, including imprisonment, which he and Silas endured at Philippi, God still gave them the courage to preach the gospel fearlessly to the Thessalonians, even though they met with opposition there also.

When they first arrived, Paul made some converts among the Jews and a larger number among the Greeks but his activities aroused the anger and indignation of many Jews, who did not like Paul presenting Jesus as the Messiah. These stirred up a riot in the city. The result was that Jason, a supporter of Paul, and his family were seized, while Paul and his companion Silas had to be hurriedly taken away to another town.

Paul now assures the Thessalonians that his exhortations do not come from any deceit or impure motives or trickery. The Greek word for ‘trickery’ was originally used of bait for catching fish and came to be used of any sort of cunning used for personal gain.

On the contrary, Paul and companions have God’s approval to be entrusted with the proclamation of the gospel and that is the basis of their preaching - to please God and not human beings. For it is God who “tests our hearts”.

In fact, they have never been motivated either by a desire to be flattered or for personal gain. They have never sought any special honours either from the Thessalonians or anyone else, even though they could have insisted on their own dignity and prestige as apostles and messengers of Christ or that materially they could have expected to have been fed and kept at the Thessalonians’ expense. Although Paul strongly believed that those preaching the Gospel had the right to be supported by the communities they visited, he himself preferred to be self-supporting.

On the contrary, he says that they live a simple life and their concern is only those they serve.”Like a mother feeding and looking after her children, we felt so devoted to you, that we would have been happy to share with you not only the gospel of God, but also our own lives, so dear had you become.”

At the same time, he and his co-workers are treating the Thessalonians with the greatest gentleness, “as gentle as any nursing mother fondling her little one”. For them they are ready not only to share the Gospel but to sacrifice their very life.

What is always so striking is how Paul can see the hand of Christ in all that happens to him and his sheer unstoppable enthusiasm in sharing the Gospel message with others, whatever the obstacles. This was because the message was not just something he was handing on; it had entered the very fibre of his being. As he will say elsewhere: “I live, no, it is not I; but Christ lives in me.”

Would that each one of us could say the same! We cannot be preachers of the Gospel until it is fully absorbed into our very selves. It cannot be just a set of doctrines which we hold to be true. We need the burning enthusiasm of Paul.

GOSPEL (Matthew 23:23-26)

We continue reading the ‘Seven Woes’; today’s reading contains the fourth and fifth.

4, You pay your tithe of mint and dill. . . (vv. 23-24)

In continuing his attack on Pharisaism, Jesus touches on two issues which are not at all irrelevant to our Christian living today. First, he attacks the mentality of those who are sticklers for tiny details of ritual or doctrine while ignoring the fundamental issues of justice, compassion and good faith. The Mosaic Law levied a tithe on agricultural produce. Some rabbis scrupulously applied the law to the most insignificant of plants.

A strict Pharisee too would carefully filter his drinking water in case he might swallow a small insect, which would be regarded as unclean. But, in being so careful of such minutiae, he might well overlook matters of much deeper importance. Jesus is not criticising a conscientious carrying out of rules and regulations but it is the attitude of hypocritical moral superiority which he attacks.

One can meet Catholics too who tie themselves in knots trying to observe the pettiest regulations and can end up becoming the prisoner of scruples. What is more, they can be highly critical of others whom they regard as ‘lax’. People who are more worried about not having observed a full 60 minutes of fast before Communion than focusing on what the wider implications of participating in the Eucharist really mean.

5, You clean the outside of cup and dish. . . (vv. 25-26)

The second point that Jesus makes is to criticise those who concentrate on the tiniest details of external behaviour while totally ignoring the inner spirit.

There are certain Christians who speak and write at length about all the things that are not being done right in the Catholic Church, in its liturgy and who claim for themselves a level of doctrinal and moral orthodoxy to which even Rome does not attain. Sometimes even the Pope does not come up to their expectations.

What is striking about these people is the almost total absence of a sense of love and compassion in their writings and actions. They are only interested in “truth” and “orthodoxy” as if these things could exist outside of the nitty-gritty of human living. They can be more concerned about the tiniest rubrical details of the liturgy than about the Eucharist as truly a sacrament of a loving community prayerfully centred on the Person of Christ.

On the outside, the behaviour is impeccable but inside there is a total lack of a true Gospel spirit, the spirit of love and integrity, of compassion and a sense of justice for all. Instead, there can be a heart full of self-righteousness, criticism, anger, resentment, contempt for those who do not think the same, all cloaked in this outer veneer of moral and ritual rectitude.

The two attitudes are closely related and all of us can be touched by them in one degree or another. Let him or her who has never criticised another fellow-Christian cast the first stone!

Week 21 | Wednesday

1 Thessalonians 2:9-13; Matthew 23:27-32

Paul defends his behaviour with the Thessalonians where he had been treated very badly by a group of people.

He reminds them of how he and his fellow evangelisers used to work night and day so as not to be a burden on them while they preached the Gospel among them. We know that, wherever he could, Paul supported himself and was not ashamed to be known by his trade, a tentmaker. As he said in yesterday’s reading, he never insisted on what he believed were his rights as an evangeliser. The Greeks tended to despise manual labour and viewed it as fit only for slaves, but Paul was not ashamed of doing any sort of work that would help further the Gospel. He never wanted to be unnecessarily dependent on others.

The Thessalonians themselves have seen - as God himself has - how Paul’s behaviour among them has always been impeccable and upright. Paul never hesitates to admit his weaknesses but he also is not afraid to speak of his strengths and he does here (see also his strong self-defence in 2 Corinthians).

He and his companions always treated the Thessalonians as a father would his children, urging them, encouraging them and appealing to them to live a life worthy of the God who calls them to share his kingdom and his glory. He is proud of the example he has set to others. It was a work combining both dedication and affection. In calling them to share God’s kingdom he is true to the core of Jesus’ teaching. It is not a term he uses very often but he did use it once to sum up the message of his teaching. This was during his address of farewell to the elders at Ephesus: “I know as I speak these words that none of you among whom I went preaching the kingdom will ever see my face again” (Acts 20:25).

Now Paul continually thanks God for them, because as soon as they heard the word which Paul brought them as God’s message, they welcomed it for what it was - not the word of a mere human being (Paul) but God’s own word, a power that is now working among them as believers. This perception has enabled them to be steadfast in the face of opposition.

We have here too a brief summary of the apostolic tradition: the message is first ‘received’, or ‘heard’. It then penetrates the mind or heart, where it is welcomed, and proves that the hearer acknowledges God has been speaking through his missionary.

In all our Christian living we, too, need to be aware that our greatest impact is made not just by the words we speak but also by the example of our lives, by the love and care and compassion that we show. And the real test of our Christian witness is not that people say how holy we are but that they themselves are led to God.

GOSPEL (Matthew 23:27-32)

We come today to the last two of the seven ‘Woes’ which Jesus throws against pharisaism. Again it is an attack on hypocrisy and he gives two examples.

6, You are like whitewashed tombs. . . (vv. 27-28)

On the one hand he compares the Pharisees to “whited sepulchres”, a phrase (like many others) that has found its way into everyday English through the King James version. In other words, they are like the tombs that people in Palestine could often see spotlessly clean in their whitewashed stones but which inside were full of the decaying and rotting bodies of the dead. One reason they were whitewashed was because a person who unwittingly stepped on a grave became ritually unclean. Whitewashing made them more visible, especially in the dark.

The Pharisees put on an external show of religious perfection down to the tiniest detail but inside their hearts and minds were full of pride and hatred and contempt for their fellow-men. It was epitomised in the story that Jesus told of the Pharisee and the tax collector who went to the temple to pray.”I thank you, Lord, that I am not like the rest of men, extortionists, unjust, adulterers or even like this tax collector here,” was the sanctimonious prayer of the Pharisee. It was, of course, to some extent true but it closed his mind to a different kind of sin altogether - his pride and imagined self-sufficiency. As Jesus will say in another place, the greatest sin of the pharisaical is their sheer blindness, the inability to see themselves for what they really are.

This, I suppose, is the most dangerous sin of the pious in any age and yet the one least likely to be confessed and repented of. It can happen to any of us.

7, You build the sepulchres of the prophets. . . (vv. 29-32)

Mention of tombs leads Jesus to comment on the Pharisees’ pride over the tombs they have built in memory of the prophets and other holy people. They congratulate themselves that, if they had been present, they would never have partaken in the actions which brought persecution and death to the prophets. Yet here is Jesus, the prophet of all prophets, whom they are preparing to kill. In the last verse of our reading, Jesus tells them to go ahead and complete the murdering of the prophets, referring to what is going to happen to himself. Another classic example of the blindness of the self-righteous.

The more committed we are to our Christian faith and to the behaviour that it expects, the greater the danger that we, too, can fall into the same trap and see ourselves on a higher level than others whose behaviour we deplore and perhaps even attack. Whole groups of such people have been appearing in recent years, people who claim to know the Church better than the Pope, who deplore the “heresies” of the Second Vatican Council, who close themselves off into elitist groups afraid of being contaminated not only by the “world” but even by other Catholics!

Week 21 | Thursday

1 Thessalonians 3:7-13; Matthew 24:42-51

Troubled by the lack of news concerning the Thessalonians, Paul had sent Timothy to Thessalonika as his representative to see how things were going in the new community. Timothy had come back with a very encouraging report, except for certain possible shortcomings in their faith. Paul is probably dealing with these defects in the last two chapters of the letter. Today’s reading reflects Paul’s reaction to the report he had been given.

Paul tells the Thessalonians that their faith has been a great encouragement in the middle of the distress and hardship endured by him and his companions. He feels he can now relax because they are remaining firm in their faith.

“How can we thank God enough for you, for all the joy we feel before our God on your account?”

Paul is grateful that his work of evangelisation in Thessalonika has been so effective. He might have congratulated himself on work well done, but instead he thanks God for the joy he gets from what God had done.

Night and day he is earnestly praying to be able to see them face to face again and to make up for any shortcomings there may be in their living of their faith.

He concludes with a lovely triple prayer. The theme of the prayer is solidarity: between Paul and the Thessalonian Christians; among themselves; between them and people everywhere (Christian love); and between them and God (holiness).

“May God the Father and the Lord Jesus make our path to you a straight one!” In other words, may there not be too many obstacles in their coming face to face again soon.

“May the Lord increase and enrich your love for each other and for everyone, so that it matches ours for you.” In Paul’s writings ‘Lord’ usually refers to Jesus and not to the Father. And he urges an all-inclusive love. Brotherly love of one another in the Christian community is only the beginning of charity; ultimately, it has to spread to love for every single person everywhere. And, once again, Paul asserts his deep affection for the Christians of Thessalonika.

“May the Lord so confirm your hearts in holiness that you may be blameless in the sight of our God and Father when our Lord Jesus comes with all his holy ones!” The word ‘holy’ (hagios) means ‘set apart (for God)’. It is used regularly in the New Testament for members of the Christian communities who, by their calling in Christ, are set apart from other people. But here ‘holy ones’ may refer to those already with God, those who have completed the work of becoming ‘holy’ and who will return with Jesus at the Parousia. Or it may also refer to the angels.

Paul’s prayer is that when the Lord comes (a constant theme in these two letters) the Thessalonians will be ready, holy and blameless in God’s sight.

Let us, too, remain firm in our service of Jesus Christ that we, too, may be ready to welcome the Lord however and whenever he comes to call us.

GOSPEL (Matthew 24:42-51)

Eschatological discourse

We enter the final phase of our readings from Matthew which will conclude on Saturday of this week. We will see selected readings from chapters 24 and 25 which form what is called the “Eschatological Discourse”. This is the fifth and final discourse, each of which is a collection of the teachings of Jesus and which are a feature of Matthew’s gospel. This discourse is concerned with the end of all things and the second and final coming of Christ to bring all things together.

The earlier part of chap 24 includes the foretelling of the destruction of Jerusalem, an event which for the Jews of the time (including those who had converted to Christianity) must have seemed like the end of the world (just as, later on, the collapse of the Roman Empire seemed to be the end of the world for St Augustine of Hippo and his contemporaries).

The early Christians had expected to see the Second Coming in their lifetime and the sacking of Jerusalem and the sacrilegious destruction of the Temple must have seemed the certain signs of the eschaton. But, by the time Matthew’s gospel came into circulation, that was already at least 15 years in the past. The end, although certain to happen, did not seem any more quite so imminent.

Matthew includes as part of the discourse a number of parousia (final coming) parables. Following a pattern we have seen in other parts of this gospel, they are seven in number. We have two short ones in today’s reading. Both consist of an exhortation for readiness to welcome the final coming of the Lord.

In the first we should be as alert in watching for the coming of the Lord as a householder would be to prevent his house being broken into and robbed. Like a thief, Jesus will come when we least expect him.

In the second parable, Jesus compares us to a servant who has been put in charge of the house while the master is away. This may refer to the community leaders in Matthew’s church and, by extension, to leaders of communities everywhere. It will be well for that servant when the master unexpectedly returns and finds his servant diligently doing his job. Readiness is measured by people consistently carrying out their responsibilities. On the other hand, the servant may think that there is no sign of the master (who had been expected to come earlier) and goes about beating up the other servants and leading a debauched life. It will be too bad for that servant when the master does suddenly appear on the scene.

The lesson is clear. Many of the Christians, who had expected the Lord to come soon, now see no sign of him and begin to backslide in the living of their Christian faith. We can be tempted to do the same thing.”Let’s have a good (that is, a morally bad) time now and we can convert later.” It is not a very wise policy. In the long run, the really good life, that is, a life based on truth and integrity, on love and compassion and sharing, will always be better than one based on phoniness, on selfishness, greed, hedonism and immediate gratification of every pleasure.

And the conversion day may never come or the chance to turn back to him who is the Way, Truth and Life. The wisest ones are those who consistently try to seek and serve their Lord at every moment of every day. They find happiness now and Jesus will not be a stranger when he comes to call them to himself.

They are the ones who are both faithful and prudent.

Week 21 | Friday

1 Thessalonians 4:1-8; Matthew 25:1-13

The latter part of Paul’s letters usually includes some practical exhortations to the particular church to which he is writing.

Here, he tells the Thessalonians that to conserve their holiness they are to recall what the apostle taught them in the name of Christ at the time of their conversion. Specifically, all forms of sexual misconduct are to be avoided, in consideration of the truth that God sanctifies his faithful by the presence of the Holy Spirit in them.

He begins by making his appeal and exhortation in the name of the Lord Jesus.”We urge and appeal to you.” He is does not talk to them arrogantly but does speak with authority in the Lord Jesus.

When he was with them he had instructed them on how to live in ways that please God and he is happy that they are so doing but he urges them to make even more progress in the way of the Lord. Paul uses this metaphor often of the Christian way. It points to steady progress.

They are well aware of the instructions Paul and his companions gave on the authority of the Lord Jesus. The word ‘instructions’ is used of authoritative commands and has a military ring.

God wants all of the Thessalonians to be holy. ‘Holiness’, as we saw yesterday, means ‘set apart’, being different from other people who live according to different standards. It is identifying with God’s will, which comes to us through Christ, that makes us holy. It is the work of the Holy Spirit in us. But, taking the English root, ‘holiness’ is related to ‘wholeness’. The ‘holy’ person is a ‘whole’ person, in which every part speaks of unity and harmony with God, with those around one, with the environment and with oneself.

Paul then spells out a particular area of being holy with which he is concerned. He exhorts the Christians to sexual integrity and self-restraint. The implication is that, from what Timothy has told him, there are some problems in this area. Therefore, he wants them to keep away from all sexual immorality and that each of them guard their body in a way which is holy and honourable.

This can refer either to a man’s own body or that of his wife, as in several rabbinic texts. For a married man to have sex with another person is to violate his wife.

His doctrine on moral behaviour, which is based on the earliest Christian teaching, invests ordinary day-to-day life with a new depth: it has the seal of Christ on it. In the first century AD moral standards were generally very low, and chastity was regarded as an unreasonable restriction, especially by men. (Married women were expected to remain faithful to their husbands; unmarried women to be virgins before marriage.) Paul, however, would not compromise on God’s clear and demanding standards.

They are not to give way to selfish lust like the nations who do not acknowledge God. The warning was needed, for Christians clearly were not immune to temptation in a hedonistic environment.

Unrestricted sexual activity is to use others for one’s pleasure and totally in conflict with the commandment to love others and to respect their dignity and personal integrity. It is to degrade the dignity of one’s own body and that of others.

So Paul says that no one should ever sin by taking advantage of a brother in such matters, because the Lord always pays back sins of that kind, as Paul had emphatically stated in the past. Sexual sin harms others besides those who engage in it. In adultery, e. g. , the spouse is always wronged. The Lord’s ‘vengeance’ is in the price that one pays for betraying one’s own integrity and the dignity of the other person. God punishes such behaviour insofar as it carries its own punishment. Such behaviour can never bring happiness and, at its worst, can result in debauchery, injury, disease, and death. This is so evident in the rampant spread of AIDS and many other sexually transmitted diseases.

On the contrary, God has called all to be holy and not immoral. And anyone who rejects this teaching is rejecting not human authority but God, who gives his Holy Spirit. The prophet Ezekiel foretold that the Spirit would be given to the messianic people. This reference draws attention to the continuity between the church of Thessalonika and the giving of this gift to the early Christian community on the day of Pentecost.

And here is still another reason for chastity: sexual sin is against God, who gives the Holy Spirit to believers for their sanctification. It is a kind of sacrilege where not only the object of sexual desire but the Spirit within that person is violated.

We live in a world dedicated to sexual licence and it is easy to be affected by it. Love and affection and some form of expressing our sexuality are important in everyone’s life but it must never be done at the expense of one’s own integrity or the integrity of another person.

We do not make our human values; we recognise and acknowledge them as coming from a source beyond ourselves.

GOSPEL (Matthew 25:1-13)

Eschatological discourse (continued)

The second chapter of this discourse consists of three long parables, with all of which we are familiar. They all have the common theme of preparation for the final coming of the Lord whenever that will be.

Today’s reading is the parable about the wise and foolish bridesmaids, literally, ‘virgins’. The story reflects common wedding customs of the time. The bridesmaids who attend on the bride are waiting for the bridegroom to come. The time of his arrival is not known. Perhaps it is his way of asserting his male authority from the very beginning of their marriage! (Just as today it is the bride who asserts her last moments of freedom by coming late!)

In the story there are 10 bridesmaids altogether. Of these we are told five were “sensible” and the others were “foolish”. The sensible girls all brought an extra supply of oil with them while the foolish ones only had their lamps. The lamps consisted of oil-soaked rags at the top of a pole and needed to have oil added every 15 minutes or so.

The bridegroom was long in coming. The implication is that he was taking much longer than expected. In fact, he was so long in coming that the girls all fell asleep. Suddenly, in the middle of the night, the call went up: “The bridegroom is on his way! Go out to meet him!”

Immediately the girls got ready and trimmed their torches. The charred edges had to be cut away and the rags soaked in more oil. The foolish ones immediately realised they were running out of oil; quite a lot was needed for this kind of torch. They ask their companions to share some of their oil. These refused on the grounds that there was not enough to go round and none of them would have enough. The foolish ones were told to go off and buy some more for themselves.

However, while they were still away, the bridegroom arrived. Those who were ready went into the marriage celebration with him and the doors were shut. When the foolish girls finally arrived with their new supply of oil, they found the doors closed in their face. They cried out: “Lord, Lord, open to us!” But the bridegroom answered: “I do not know you.”

Again this is a parable warning us all to be ready when the Lord comes. In the early Church, he had at first been expected to come in the very lifetime of the early Christians. This belief is reflected in the First Letter to the Thessalonians (which is read at this time in Year I) and which is the earliest writing of the New Testament.

But Jesus did not come and, by the time Matthew’s gospel appeared, people were beginning to realise that his coming could be in a more distant future. It is in this context that today’s parable gives a warning. If the Lord was not going to come soon, then some people might begin to take things easy and become lax in their living of the Gospel. Today’s passage suggests that that is not a very wise way of behaving.

The bridegroom may not have come when expected but he did come. And, when he came, half of the group were not ready. In other places, Jesus has warned that we do not know the day or the hour, for he will come like a thief in the night. The only policy is constant readiness. If we are not ready and he does come, then we may find the doors closed and hear what are perhaps the most chilling words in the whole Gospel: “I do not know you.”

In John’s gospel Jesus says that, as the Shepherd, he knows his sheep and they know him. Not to be known by Jesus means to have broken our relationship with him through sinful and loveless behaviour. To be in that state when he comes is truly tragic. The choice is ours; we have been given adequate warning.

While the Gospel is speaking about the final or eschatological coming of Jesus as King and Lord, it would be very complacent of us to think that there are no signs of it happening in the near future. That would put us in the same category as the foolish bridesmaids! While the final coming may still be far off, our own rendezvous with the Lord can be at any time. For all practical purposes, that is the time we have to prepare for.

Just yesterday our newspapers in the city where I am writing this reported an unmarked police car going out of control in a crowded downtown area, killing two people and seriously injuring others. You or I could have been one of those victims, young and in perfect health with a whole life before us. But the Lord called.

If it had been me, would I have had “oil in my lamp”? That is, what would I be able to show the Lord in terms of Gospel-centred living? Maybe we think the “sensible” girls in the story were selfish not to have shared their oil, but there are some things which we have to bring to the Lord on our own. We cannot borrow the good life that someone else has led. It is has to be totally ours.

Clearly, the best way to prepare is not to think anxiously of the future but to concentrate on the here and now. Let us learn to live totally in the present, to seek and find God there. If we can do that, then all the rest will take care of itself. And, whether the Groom arrives early or late, it will not matter. Because he has been constantly part of my everyday life. And, apart from the insurance that it gives, is it not by far the best way to spend our days?

Week 21 | Saturday

1 Thessalonians 4:9-12; Matthew 25:14-30

Two pieces of advice for the Thessalonians today. They have heeded Christ’s message of love of neighbour and should improve it within the community. He urges that they concern themselves with their own affairs, each labouring faithfully to earn his own living and all presenting a good example to the outside world.

Having warned them about sexual abuses (‘loving’ in the wrong way), Paul now goes on to speak about true love for each other. ‘Brotherly love’ (philadelphia) was originally spoken of siblings of the same parent. But in the New Testament it always means love of fellow-believers in Christ, all of whom have the same heavenly Father.

Paul feels there is really no need to write to them about this, because they have already learnt that lesson from God. Not only that, this is the way they have been dealing with their brothers and sisters in Christ all over Macedonia (of which Thessalonika was the capital city). But, again as before, he suggests there is room for improvement.

He cites a few areas:

- They should make a point of living quietly and at peace with each other

- They should attend to their own affairs and not meddle in those of others.

- They should earn their own living, working with their hands, as Paul had taught them.

The Greeks in general thought that manual labour was degrading and fit only for slaves. However, the Christians did take seriously the need for earning their own living, but some of the Thessalonians, perhaps as a result of their belief in the imminent return of Christ (see 2 Thess 3:11), were neglecting work and relying on others to support them. And these same people, with nothing to do, were perhaps urging others to join them. Paul says they should keep their ideas to themselves and not interfere with people who are trying to make a living in a normal way.

If they live as Paul suggests, the Thessalonian Christians will learn the respect of outsiders and not be dependent on others, because they are taking care of their own needs. On the other hand, Christians in need because of their idleness are not true Christians.

Trust in God is all very well but we are also expected to use the gifts he has given us. See today’s Gospel which speaks of how three people used the talents God gave them.

A saying has been attributed to St Ignatius Loyola which fits:

“Do all things as if everything depended on God and nothing on oneself;

and do all things as if everything depended on oneself and nothing on God.”

GOSPEL (Matthew 25:14-30)

Eschatological discourse (concluded):

Today is our final reading from Matthew’s gospel and on Monday we will begin the reading of Luke’s gospel. Today also is also our last reading from the fifth and final discourse of Jesus in Matthew’s gospel.

There are two great passages left - the parable of the talents and the description of the last judgement - but we will only be taking the first of these. Both deal with the final judgment and, like the parable of the bridesmaids, are warnings on how we are to prepare.

The parable speaks of an employer who, before he set off on a journey, entrusted his servants with large sums of money. He gave them different amounts according to their ability. One got five talents, one two and the third just one. A ‘talent’ was an enormous amount of money in the ancient world, so five talents was a veritable fortune. Originally, the term stood for a unit of weight, about 75 pounds or 30-something kilos and later for a unit of coinage, the value depending on the metal used. Actually, the current meaning of ‘talent’ comes from this parable.

The amount given out indicates the generosity of the employer. But the money was not for their own personal enjoyment. It was meant to be used productively.

The first two both traded actively with the money they had been given and doubled their original capital. The third man, however, buried his money in the ground (the most secure place in a pre-banking society).

When the employer came back, the first two presented their accounts. The employer was very pleased and they were entrusted with even more. To each he said, “Well done, good and faithful servant, you have shown you can be faithful in small things, I will trust you with greater; come and join in your master’s happiness.”

Then the third man came along with his one talent. He had not traded with it because he was afraid he would lose his money.”I had heard you were a hard man, reaping where you have not sown and gathering where you have not scattered; so I was afraid. . . Here is your talent, have it back.” Ironically, he was the one who was given the least and from whom the least was expected. But even that little he failed to produce. Perhaps he even expected to be praised for his prudence.

The employer does not deny the charge of being a hard man, but he accuses the man of not having done even the least thing to increase his capital. He could have deposited or lent the money and got some interest. But he had absolutely nothing to show of his own.

The money is taken from him and given to the one who had five talents. Surprising? Unfair? Not really. This man had already shown he was a very good investment. And Jesus sums up: “To everyone who has will be given more, and he will have more than enough; but from the man who has not, even what he has will be taken away.”

The word ‘talent’ which in biblical times referred to a huge amount of money now denotes a particular gift or ability with which a person is endowed.”He has a great talent for music; she has a great talent for design.” In that sense, we have all been endowed with talents in varying degrees or, to use a word which Paul prefers, ‘charisms’. In either case they indicate some distinctive ability which is to a large extent innate or God-given.

Everyone of us has been endowed in some way. And, as in the parable, some are greatly endowed and others less so. All that is asked is that we make use of that gift or those gifts to the best of our ability and not for ourselves alone (that is to bury them in the ground) but to build up the kingdom and make a positive contribution to the community to which we belong.

At the end we will be asked, as the men in the parable were, “How did you use the gifts I gave you and how productive were they in furthering the growth of the Kingdom?”

Today then is a day for us to identify what those gifts actually are. It is possible that some people have never given it much thought. They see their Christian life in rather passive terms, just looking after themselves, living in conformity to the commandments of God and the Church, fulfilling their ‘religious duties’, making sure to die “in the state of grace”. This, in effect, is to bury one’s talents.

Today’s gospel makes it very clear that far more is expected of us. We are expected to make an active and positive contribution to the work of the Kingdom and of the Christian community as the Body of Christ. In practice, that means taking an active part in our Church, in our parish and in making a contribution to the betterment of our society. So, it is very important for us to spend some time in reflecting on what are my unique ‘talents’ or gifts or abilities and then to ask how and to what end I am using them?

And the time to do that is today because, as we have been amply warned, we do not know when our ‘employer’ is coming back to check his accounts with us.

The end of today’s passage indicates that if we do not move forward, or are not productive, then we go backwards. We cannot remain static or purely passive in God’s service. To do nothing is not a possible option. The more we give and share with others from the resources we have the more we are personally enriched; on the other hand, to cling to our gifts and keep them just for ourselves is to become smaller in every way.

Week 22 | Monday

Readings - 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18; Luke 4:16-30

FIRST READING (1 Thessalonians 4:13-18)

The early Christians, including the Thessalonians, were convinced that Jesus would return in their lifetime. They were consequently upset about the fate of their brothers and sisters who had already died. What would happen to them if they were not around to greet the Lord when he came?

So here Paul takes up the practice among the Thessalonians of mourning excessively for their dead, a reaction deriving from the stress placed by the community on their belief that the Second Coming of Christ was going to happen very soon, definitely in their lifetime. But now people were dying off before this took place: what was going to happen to them? Did they think that the dead, in accordance with Jewish and Greek belief, went to a place for the dead (Sheol or Hades) from which there was no escape? And so they would not be around when Jesus came to take all the Christians to himself?

The apostle reminds them of the Christian doctrine of the resurrection of the dead in Christ. On the basis of Christ’s teaching, he affirms that the resurrection of the dead is to precede the Second Coming. Those who are alive at the time of the latter will not have the advantage over the dead of being the first witnesses to it. On the contrary, the Lord will first command the dead to rise; the living will then join them and both groups will be witnesses of the Parousia.

The doctrine spoken of here is to be remembered when there are more deaths in the community. Since Paul does not know the time of the Parousia, he aligns himself with the Thessalonians in the hope of living to that day, i. e. , within the first Christian generation. In his mind such a possibility seems not to have been excluded by the teaching of Jesus himself.

Now to the reading proper.

The converts in Thessalonica had obviously been worried about friends and relatives who had died and would not be there to see the coming of the Lord. Replying to their questions Paul affirms the fundamental doctrine of the resurrection so as to strengthen their faith and hope.

Paul wants the Thessalonians to be quite certain about the fate of those who have “fallen asleep”. This euphemism for death was common in both the Old and New Testaments and in Greek literature. It was natural, then, to refer to ‘resurrection’ to new life or from death as an ‘awakening’. For the Christian, sleep is a particularly apt metaphor for death, because of its finality.

Some of the Thessalonians seem to have misunderstood the meaning of the Parousia and thought all believers would live until Christ returned. When some died, the question then arose, “Will those who have died have part in that great day?”

But, says Paul, there is no need to grieve over them, as others do who have no hope. Inscriptions on tombs and references in literature show that first-century pagans viewed death with horror, as the end of everything. The Christian attitude was in strong contrast (see 1 Cor 15:55-57; Phil 1:21-23).

For “we believe that Jesus died and rose again and, in the same way, God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep in Jesus” (i. e. , those who have died as Christians). The resurrection of Jesus is absolutely essential for Christian belief in a future life. As Paul wrote to the Christians of Corinth: “If Christ has not been raised, our preaching is void of content and your faith is empty too. . . If Christ was not raised, your faith is worthless. . . and those who have fallen asleep in Christ are the deadest of the dead. . . If our hopes in Christ are limited to this life only, we are the most pitiable of people. But, as it is, Christ is now raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep” (1 Cor 15:14,17-20)

Paul can also state from the Lord’s own teaching, namely, that those who are still alive when the Lord comes will not have any advantage over those who have fallen asleep, that is, who have already died. The Thessalonians had evidently been concerned that those among them who died would miss their place in the great events when the Lord came, and Paul assures them that this will not be the case. There is no exact reference in the written gospels for this saying of Jesus. Perhaps Paul is relying here on traditions he had received from others but which did not find their way into the gospel texts. There must have been many such sayings.

“We who are still alive” that is, those believers who are still alive at Christ’s Second Coming. ‘We’ does not necessarily mean that Paul thought he himself would be alive then. He often identified himself with those he wrote to or about. Elsewhere he says that God will raise “us” at that time (1 Cor 6:14; 2 Cor 4:14). If he is including himself among those who will be present at the Parousia it is more by hope or desire rather than by conviction.

Paul then gives an image of the Parousia using traditional apocalyptic imagery for a divine intervention. It is not to be taken as a literal description of an experience that is totally beyond our imagination.

“At the signal given by the voice of the Archangel and the trumpet of God, the Lord himself will come down from heaven.” The only named archangel in the Scripture is Michael (Jude 9; Daniel 10:13). In Luke Gabriel is simply called an angel, similarly with Raphael in the Book of Tobit. Later tradition calls them all ‘archangels’. The ‘trumpet’, together with voice and clouds were traditional signs that accompanied a theophany, a divine manifestation, such as that at Mount Sinai. They were later adopted as conventional elements in apocalyptic literature e. g. Matthew’s description of the coming of the Son of Man at the end of time (Matt 24:29ff).

Then, in a reassuring remark, Paul affirms that “those who died in Christ will be the first to rise and, only after that, those who are still alive at that time will be taken up into the clouds, together with the others, to meet the Lord in the air”. This is the only place in the New Testament where a ‘rapture’, being caught up or taken up into God, is clearly referred to. Although some hold that such experiences will be secret, Paul seems to be describing something open and public, with loud voices and a trumpet blast.

Contrary to their fears, Paul says that “this is the way by which we will be with the Lord for ever” Of all the details given here: that the dead will answer the summons by returning to life, that they and the living will be taken to meet the Lord, and that they will accompany him to the judgement with which the eternal kingdom begins, the essential one is the last - eternal life with Christ. That is the ‘salvation’, the ‘glory’, the ‘kingdom’ that Jesus shares among his chosen followers.

And, Paul concludes, “with thoughts like these, you should encourage one another”. The primary purpose of the whole passage is not primarily to give a chronology of future events, though that is involved, but above all to urge the Thessalonian community to mutual encouragement.

As mentioned, it is not necessary to take the scenario here described too literally; in fact, it would be quite wrong to do so. It consists of traditional apocalyptic and scriptural language to describe the indescribable - our future life with God after our death.

Very soon in the life of the Church people began to think less and less about this problem. We need to remember that this Letter is a very early Church writing. By the time we get to the gospels this anxiety has passed and the concern is now about how to live in a time of uncertain and presumably lengthy or indefinite duration.

But the gospel warnings we saw in Matthew’s gospel last week still remain valid. The critical issue is not the when or the how of the Lord’s final coming but the when and how of our leaving this earth. Will I be ready? Am I ready now?

GOSPEL (Luke 4:16-30)

We begin today the reading of Luke’s gospel which will bring us up to the end of the Church year. We have already gone through Matthew and Mark and John’s gospel has been spread through various parts of the year, especially during the Advent, Christmas, Lent and Easter seasons.

The gospel is a companion volume to the book of the Acts and the language and structure of these two books indicate that both were written by the same person. They are addressed to the same individual, Theophilus, and the second volume refers to the first.

Luke presents the works and teachings of Jesus that are especially important for understanding the way of salvation. Its scope is complete from the birth of Christ to his ascension. It appeals to both Jews and Gentiles.

However, we take up Luke’s gospel at the beginning of Jesus’ public life (chap. 4). After his baptism he had returned “in the power of the Spirit to Galilee”, the northern province of Palestine and his home province. Already people were talking about him everywhere.

Now, as our reading opens, we find him in Nazareth, a small town in Galilee and the place where he grew up. From the verses immediately preceding, it does not seem that Jesus actually began his ministry in Nazareth. The event described here may not have taken place until a year later. One suggestion (NIV Bible) is that all that is described in John’s gospel between 1:19 to 4:42 took place between the temptation in the desert and the moving north to Galilee (vv. 13 and 14).

But Luke has arranged the structure of his gospel so that Jesus will begin his public life in Nazareth and will gradually proceed southwards towards his goal, Jerusalem, without turning back. In the other Synoptics he moves around Galilee in all directions and John suggests that he made a number of visits to Jerusalem during his public life.

The Jerusalem Bible suggests that our passage today actually combines three distinct parts:

the first, vv. 16-22 (Jesus is honoured), occurring at the time indicated by Matt 4:13;

the second, vv. 23-24 (Jesus astonishing his audience), the visit of which Matthew and Mark speak;

the third, vv. 25-30 (the life of Jesus threatened), not mentioned by Matthew or Mark and to be placed towards the end of the Galilean ministry.

In this way Luke presents an introductory tableau which is a summary and symbol of Christ’s great offer and of its contemptuous rejection by his own people.

As the reading opens we find Jesus in the town synagogue. It is a Sabbath day. He gets up to read the scripture and comments on it. The ruler of the synagogue could authorise any adult Jew to read the scripture lesson. The passage he reads is full of significance. It comes from the prophet Isaiah and Jesus’ reading of it amounts to a manifesto or what we might call today a “mission statement”. ‘Books’ in those days were in the form of scrolls and the Scriptures were kept in a special place in the synagogue and given to the reader by an attendant. Jesus may have chosen the passage himself or it may have been assigned for that day.

But it is more than just a mission statement. As he reads it becomes clear that the whole statement is about Jesus himself.”The Spirit of the Lord is upon me.” This has already been confirmed during his baptism in the river Jordan when “the Holy Spirit came down on him in the form of a dove” and a voice was heard to say, “You are my beloved Son; in you I am well pleased” (Luke 3:22).

“Because he has anointed me.” In saying this Jesus is making an unequivocal claim to be the Messiah or the Christ, the long-awaited liberating King of Israel. The word “Messiah”, translated into Greek as Christos, means someone who is anointed with oil. (We call the oil in baptism and confirmation ‘chrism’.) And a person was made king by having oil poured over his head. (We remember how David was anointed king.) Jesus, of course, was not literally anointed but had been figuratively ‘anointed’ by the coming of the Spirit on him in his baptism. ‘Anointing’ is our equivalent of ‘coronation’, symbolised by the putting of a crown on the new king.

Then comes the mission of this King:

To preach the gospel to the poor,
to heal the broken-hearted,
to proclaim liberty to captives and
recovery of sight to the blind,
to set at liberty those who are hurt
and to proclaim a year acceptable to the Lord.

There is nothing here of restoring the glories of Israel, nothing about conquering enemies and laying waste their lands. No, it is about letting the poor of this world hear the Good News of God’s love for them. It is about healing and reconciliation. It is about liberating those who are tied down by any form of enslavement. It is about helping people to see clearly the true meaning of life. It is about restoring wholeness to people’s lives and to societies. It is about the inauguration of the Kingdom by its King.

It is, in short, the whole picture of Jesus that will unfold in the pages of Luke, a gospel which focuses on the poor and vulnerable, a gospel of tenderness and compassion, a gospel of the Spirit and of joy, a gospel of prayer and healing.

It is about “proclaiming a year acceptable to the Lord”. This refers to the Messianic age when salvation would be proclaimed. Isaiah in the original text is alluding to the Year of Jubilee, when every 50 years slaves were set free, debts were cancelled and ancestral lands were returned to the original family. Isaiah was thinking mainly of freedom from Babylonian captivity but Jesus was speaking of liberation across the board of human living.

And, as he finished the reading, Jesus put down the scroll and said that these things were now being fulfilled as they were hearing them.

And the townspeople who thought they knew him so well were overawed by the wisdom with which he spoke. This positive reaction to Jesus is a favourite theme in Luke.”Is not this Joseph’s son?” they asked rhetorically. But they were wrong. He was not Joseph’s son; he was the son of Mary and of the Father, the divine Word sharing our ‘flesh’. (As suggested above, this event may have occurred on a second visit.)

And this in turn leads us to the third section of the reading which provides an unexpected turn of events and is more in harmony with the later part of Jesus’ public life. Jesus’ hearers were surprised at the way he spoke but they were not moved to change. After all, he was just the son of Joseph, and someone they knew so well could have nothing to say to them. At the same time Jesus says they, his own townspeople, must be wondering why he is not doing the things in Nazareth that he was doing in places like Capernaum.

Capernaum, apparently a sizeable town, was where Peter lived and Jesus made his house the centre out of which he did his missionary work in Galilee. A 5th century basilica now stands on the supposed site of the house and there is a 4th century synagogue quite near.

The reason for their non-acceptance is that they do not really accept him for what he is. He reminds them that prophets are seldom accepted in their own place. Familiarity blinds people to their message.”I know who he is and he has nothing to say to me.” Jesus then gives two rather provocative examples:

During a great famine in the time of the prophet Elijah he was sent to help not his fellow Israelites but a poor widow in Sarepta, near Sidon in non-Jewish territory. Sidon was one of the oldest Phoenician cities on the Mediterranean coast and about 33 km north of Tyre. Later, Jesus would heal the daughter of a Gentile woman here.

And in the time of the prophet Elisha, there were many lepers in Israel but he was sent to cure Naaman, a Gentile general from Syria.

God reaching out to Gentiles through his prophets sets the stage for the Gentiles to receive the message of the Prophet Jesus, which is so much a theme of Luke’s writings. But these remarks so angered the people of Nazareth that they dragged Jesus to the brow of a hill with the intention of throwing him down but he just walked through them. Whether he did this miraculously or from the sheer power of his personality is not clear. In any case, his time had not yet come.

Prophetic voices being rejected by their own is a phenomenon only too common in our own day. And it was something Jesus foretold would happen to his followers, simply for being his followers and proclaiming his vision of life. In the meantime, let us make Jesus’ mission statement our own. It is what being a Christian means.

Week 22 | Tuesday

Readings - 1 Thessalonians 5:1-6,9-11; Luke 4:31-37

FIRST READING (1 Thessalonians 5:1-6,9-11)

Today we have our final reading from this letter. Incidentally, we will not be reading the Second Letter to the Thessalonians until this time next year.

Paul continues what we saw in yesterday’s reading on the subject of the Lord’s final coming. The theme today is watchfulness.

As far as the Lord’s coming is concerned, there is no point in talking about times and dates because “the Day of the Lord is going to come like a thief in the night” (a phrase used later in the Gospel).

‘Times and seasons’ is a cliche. Behind it is the idea that God is outside time but, at the same time, controls time and its divisions. There have always been some Christians who try to fix the date of Our Lord’s return (“The end is nigh!”) and some Thessalonians may have been among them. We saw earlier how some Thessalonians were not bothering to work any more because they believed that the Lord was due any day soon. Paul wants to scotch such a mentality.

The expression Day of the Lord goes back to Amos 5:18. In the Old Testament it is a time when God will come and intervene with judgement and/or blessing. In the New Testament the thought of judgment continues but it is also the “day of redemption” (Eph 4:30); the “day of God” (2 Pet 3:12), or of Christ (1 Cor 1:8; Phil 1:6); and “the last day” (John 6:39), the “great Day” (Jude 6) or simply “the day” (2 Thess 1:10). It is the climax of all things. There will be some preliminary signs, but the coming will be as unexpected as that of a thief in the night (cf. Matt 24:43-44).

Paul, in fact, asserts he has no idea when the Last Day will come, and he merely repeats what the Lord said about having to stay awake till it comes. The Day of the Lord will come like a thief so it is necessary to stay awake because it will come soon. At first Paul expected he might live to see the Last Day; he later realised he might die before it and warns people it will not come as soon as they thought. More than anything, the prospect of how long it would take to convert the pagans made it certain that the Last Day would not come for a very long time.

Paul warns that it is precisely when people are saying how quiet and peaceful everything is that sudden destruction comes on them. It will come as suddenly as labour pains on a pregnant woman and there will be no escape. This ‘destruction’ will not mean annihilation but exclusion from the Lord’s presence, the end of real living and the nullification of all human ‘success’ and accomplishment. Hell is being separated from God and all that God stands for, separated from the deepest needs of our being.

Paul emphasises the surprise that will strike the unbeliever especially. The word ‘sudden’ here is only found once in another New Testament text but in the same context: “The Great Day will suddenly close on you like a trap” (Luke 21:34). In speaking about labour pains, the emphasis is not on the pain but rather on the suddenness and inevitability of such pains for an expectant mother.

“So, brothers, do not live in the dark, that the Day should take you unawares like a thief in the night.” True believers do not live in darkness nor do they belong to darkness. The mention of ‘the Day’ without further qualification helps Paul to introduce the mention of light and day and contrast ‘wakefulness’ with the dark, night and sleep, and also make the contrast between Christians (children of the light) and others (children of darkness).

The Thessalonian Christians, says Paul, “are all children (literally, ‘sons’) of light and children of the day. . . and do not belong to night or darkness”. In Semitic languages (such as Hebrew) to be the ‘son of’ a particular quality meant to be characterised by that quality. Christians do not simply live in the light; they are characterised by light, they radiate light. (Compare Jesus saying of himself, “I AM the Light of the world”, John 8:12, and of his followers, “You are the light of the world”, Matt 5:14.)

As children of the day, then, they “should not go on sleeping as everyone else does, but stay wide awake and sober”. Unbelievers are insensitive to things of the spirit, they are in a kind of sleep. Such sleep is not for the “children of light”. On the contrary, they are to be on the watch, ready for the coming of the Lord no matter when it happens. They need too to be ‘sober’, in full control of themselves and aware of what is going on around them. This contrasts with what Paul says in the next verse (not in our reading): “Night is the time for sleepers to sleep and night the time for drunkards to be drunk.”

They should realise that God’s plan for them is not vengeful punishment but that they should win salvation through Jesus Christ. God is on our side; he wants to be with us and for us to be with him. It was his will that Jesus died for us so that “awake or asleep” (i. e. whether still living or already dead), we should live united with him. The same opportunities for salvation are open to all - the living and the dead alike.

Paul then ends with an exhortation he gave earlier: “So give encouragement to each other, and keep strengthening one another, as you do already.” Literally, he tells them to build each other up, using a verb that basically applies to the building of houses, but frequently used by him for ‘building up’ the Body of Christ, which the Christian community is.

All in all, it is a message of positive hope and confidence and reassurance.

We, too, need to maintain a balance between being ready to be called at any moment of any day but being free from unnecessary fear and anxiety about the time or circumstances of our death. Let Paul’s attitude be ours: “Living or dead, I long to be united with my Lord.” The best preparation is to live always in the now: seeking, finding and responding to God in every person and in every experience of every moment of every day. Such a person will never be taken by surprise.

GOSPEL (Luke 4:31-37)

Immediately after his mixed reception in Nazareth, Jesus moves on to Capernaum, a town on the north shore of Galilee, which was to be the base from which Jesus did much of his missionary work. As in Nazareth, he taught the people in the synagogue on the Sabbath. Unlike in Nazareth, “his teaching made a deep impression” on the people because he spoke “with authority”. He did not quote other authorities, like the teachers of the law, because his authority was directly from God, it was his own.

At the same time, it was not the authority of domination. It was the authority of someone who has access to special knowledge, the authority of someone who speaks in his own name and not just on behalf of others, the authority of one who empowers others and makes them grow. (‘Authority’ comes from the Latin auctoritas, which in turn comes from the verb augere, to increase or augment).

And Jesus’ authority is not only in word and teaching. Right there in the synagogue as he speaks is a man possessed by an “unclean spirit”. The spirit speaks through the man. It speaks in fear of the power of Jesus.”Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are, the Holy One of God.” This title seems to indicate that the spirit recognises Jesus’ divine origin but not his Messiahship. There was a belief in those times that knowing the exact name of one’s opponent gave one power over him.

Jesus ordered the evil spirit of the man who was thrown to the ground but not hurt. The people are amazed. Exorcism was not new to them but they had never seen it done with such speed and effectiveness. They are astounded again at the power and authority of Jesus. They realise they are in the presence of someone very special, in fact, the “Holy One of God”.

Each one of us is given authority of some kind - as a parent, a teacher, our job responsibility. . . Let us make sure that we use it in such a way as to enhance the abilities of others rather than diminish them.

Week 22 | Wednesday

Readings - Colossians 1:1-8; Luke 4:38-44

Today we begin reading from Paul’s letter to the Christians in the city of Colossae, on the west coast of what is now Turkey.

The letters to the Christians of Ephesus and Colossae (both in the Roman Province of Asia, now part of western Turkey) and the letter to Philemon are all closely related. All three were written while Paul was under arrest in Rome.

Several hundred years before Paul’s day, Colossae had been a leading city in Asia Minor. It was located on the Lycus River and on the great east-west trade route leading from Ephesus on the Aegean to the Euphrates River. By the first century AD (when this Letter was written) Colossae was diminished to a second-rate market town and had been surpassed long ago in power and importance by the neighbouring towns of Laodicea and Hierapolis, both of which are cited in the Letter (see Col 4:13).

What gave Colossae importance in New Testament terms, however, was the fact that, during Paul’s three-year ministry in Ephesus, Epaphras had been converted and had carried the Gospel to Colossae. The young church that resulted then became the target of heretical attack, which led to Epaphras’s visit to Paul in Rome and ultimately to the writing of the Colossian letter.

The danger at Colossae was due to basically Jewish speculations the Christians had taken up about the heavenly or cosmic powers. These were the powers thought to be responsible for the regular movement of the cosmos, and the speculations about them, much influenced by hellenistic philosophy, attached an importance to these powers that threatened the supremacy of Christ. Paul’s point is not to deny these powers but to show that Christos Kyrios, Christ the Lord, has established a new order of things and he now governs the cosmos.

Paul’s purpose is to refute this Colossian heresy. To accomplish this goal, he exalts Christ as the very image of God (1:15), the Creator (1:16), the pre-existent Sustainer of all things (1:17), the Head of the church (1:18), the First to be resurrected (1:18), the Fullness of deity in body form (1:19; 2:9) and the Reconciler (1:20-22). Christ is completely adequate. We “have been given fullness in Christ” (2:10).

(Notes edited from Jerusalem Bible and New International Version Study Bible)

It is a relatively short letter and contains much material also found in the longer letter to the Ephesians.

Following the custom of putting the writer’s name at the beginning of a letter, Paul introduces himself as an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and his fellow-evangeliser, Timothy.

Right from the opening words he reveals how Christ-centred he is. In this relatively short letter, he uses the title ‘Christ’ 26 times and the title ‘Lord’ (referring to Christ) 7 times.

Timothy is also mentioned in 2 Corinthians, Philippians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians and Philemon, but Paul is really the sole author of the letter, as indicated by his constant use of ‘I’. In fact, at the end of the letter he says it has been penned in his own hand (4:18).

The letter is addressed to “God’s holy people in Colossae, our faithful brothers in Christ” wishing them grace and peace from God, the Father of all.

Paul frequently calls the members of Christian communities the ‘holy ones’. It is a term which includes the Old Testament idea of the people of God but here also expresses a relationship with Christ. They have been called by God to union with Christ and have experienced the spiritual benefits of this union. The awareness of it helps them to be “faithful brothers in Christ” i. e. , dedicated to working together on the tasks implied in their calling. And Paul mentions their spiritual union “in Christ” no less than 13 times in the course of the Letter.

Following the opening greeting there is an expression of thanksgiving and a prayer which forms the rest of the reading and will be continued in tomorrow’s reading.

Recalling his prayers for them and the deeply satisfying account of them he has received, Paul congratulates the Colossians upon their acceptance of Christ and their faithful efforts to live his gospel. For their encouragement he mentions the success of the gospel in other places, and assures them that his knowledge of their community is accurate since he has been in personal contact with Epaphras, their presumed founder.

“We give thanks for you to God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, continually in our prayers ever since we heard about your faith in Christ Jesus and that love that you show towards all God’s holy people, because of the hope that is stored up for you in heaven.”

Every one of Paul’s letters, except that to the Galatians, begins with thanks or praise. The possible reason for Galatians being an exception is that Paul was quite disturbed by developments there. In Colossians thanks is an important theme, repeated a number of times. The Letters, too, do not thank humans for their faith and love but rather God, who is the source of these virtues. And, although Paul usually begins with words of thanks and praise, the words of concern or criticism will usually follow later on.

We might note also that thanks is given for the manifestations of faith, hope and love that the Colossians so clearly display. The three great Christian virtues of faith, love and hope appear also in Romans, 1 Corinthians, Galatians, 1 Thessalonians and Hebrews.

And that hope of a future life without end has come to them through “the word of truth”, the Gospel and has come to them in the same way that it is producing fruit and growing all over the world. This Christian hope is not mere wishful thinking but based on firm assurances that what is believed will be realised.

“All over the world” - even if we mean the known world of the Mediterranean, is still somewhat of an exaggeration. But it does dramatise the rapid and remarkable spread and acceptance of the Gospel into nearly every corner of the Roman Empire within 30 years of Pentecost. In refuting the charge of the false teachers, Paul will insist that the Christian faith is not merely confined to Colossae or the region but is ‘worldwide’. Paul knew that because he travelled so much but many of those he is writing to would have very little contact outside their own immediate environment.

And their strong Christian faith is something they learnt from Epaphras, “our very dear fellow-worker and a trustworthy deputy for us as Christ’s servant”. And it was he who also told Paul about their love in the Spirit.

Epaphras was a native and probably the founder of the Colossian church but also evangelised in the nearby towns of Laodicea and Hierapolis. (The Book of Revelation has some hard words for the Christians of Laodicea.) Paul was clearly fond of him and admired him, calling him a “fellow prisoner” (Philemon 23), his dear fellow servant and a faithful minister of Christ.

Epaphras was the one who told Paul at Rome about problems in the Colossian church and thereby stimulated him to write this letter. His name, a shortened form of Epaphroditus (from ‘Aphrodite’, the Greek goddess of love), suggests he was a convert from paganism. He is not the Epaphroditus mention in the Letter to the Philippians.

Let us today give thanks for the faith we have received and also to those through whom we have received it and who have helped to enrich over the years. We might also consider how many people’s faith has been enriched by their coming in contact with us and how much more we could do in this regard.

GOSPEL (Luke 4:38-44)

After the scene in the synagogue where Jesus healed a man possessed by an evil spirit, he goes straight to Peter’s house. It was a Sabbath day so Jesus could not move around or do any major activity. He seems to have used this house as his base when in Capernaum and that part of Galilee. (Jesus had “nowhere to lay his head”, no dwelling of his own, but it seems clear that he was not a streetsleeper. There were always people ready to offer him hospitality - a custom of the Middle East and a model for Christians of every age and place.)

Peter’s mother-in-law was in the grip of a fever and the disciples begged Jesus to do something for her. (We might remember that the first pope was married.) Jesus stood over her and, with a word, cured her. Immediately she got up and began to serve Jesus and his group.

There is a lesson here. Health and healing are not just for the individual. Her healing immediately restored her to the community and the duty of serving that community. (And not just because she was a woman! If it had been the father-in-law, the same would apply.) As long as we are in health our energies are meant to be directed to the building up of the community and not simply for our personal enjoyment.

“Now when the sun was setting” - we need to remember it was a Sabbath. The Sabbath went from sunset on Friday to sunset on Saturday (so Jesus could not be properly buried on the Friday evening when he died). According to the traditions, Jews could not travel more than two-thirds of a mile or carry any load. Only after sunset could the sick be brought to Jesus.

As soon as the Sabbath was over, large numbers brought their sick to him. He “laid his hands on every one of them” and healed them all. As Jesus had announced in the synagogue at Nazareth, the Kingdom of God had arrived and was entering the lives of people, bringing them health and wholeness.

Many were also liberated from the power of evil spirits. These spirits shouted at Jesus “You are the Son of God”. As we mentioned earlier, by using Jesus’ title they hoped to exert control over him. It did not work, of course. Whether these were actual cases of possession or were psychological or moral disorders which made people behave in abnormal ways and perhaps ways harmful to themselves and others is not clear. But clearly the presence of the Kingdom is being felt.

At daybreak - Jesus had been working the whole night for the people - he went off into a quiet place. The desert is the place where God is to be found and very likely, as Mark tells us, Jesus went there to pray and to be alone. The people, who had seen what he did for them, wanted him to stay with them. Their attitude is in marked contrast to the people of Nazareth.

But he could and would not.”I must preach the kingdom of God to other cities also; that is why I have been sent.” And so we are told that he was now preaching in the synagogues of Judea - in the south of the country, although the term may simply refer to the whole of Jewish territory.

No place could have a monopoly on his attentions. We need to attach ourselves to Jesus and keep close to him but we cannot cling to him in a way that prevents others from experiencing his healing touch.

On the contrary, it is our task as his disciples to see that as many as possible come to know and experience his love, his compassion and his healing.

Week 22 | Thursday

Readings - Colossians 1:9-14; Luke 5:1-11

FIRST READING (Colossians 1:9-14)

Paul continues from yesterday’s reading his words of praise and encouragement for the Christians of Colossae.

Moved by Epaphras’ account, Paul has prayed fervently for the Colossians that their response to the gospel may bring the fullest knowledge of God’s will, “through perfect wisdom and spiritual insight”. He expects a mutual interaction between their life according to the gospel and this knowledge, which will reveal the power of God’s presence among them, encourage them to courage and calm determination, and result in grateful love of the Father for his saving gifts. For the Father conquers the power of evil over men by offering them the power of his Son, who is his love in person and has already forgiven their sins. (NAB)

Following on what Paul has heard from Epaphras about the strong faith of the Colossians, he makes a beautiful prayer on their behalf. We will lay it out here in a way that will make it easier for us to see its contents. It is a prayer that we can make for ourselves and for other people. Let us hear Paul saying this prayer for each one of us:

We ask that through perfect wisdom and spiritual understanding
you should reach the fullest knowledge of his will
and so be able to lead a life worthy of the Lord,
a life acceptable to him in all its aspects,
bearing fruit in every kind of good work
and growing in knowledge of God,
fortified, in accordance with his glorious strength, with all power
always to persevere and endure,
giving thanks with joy to the Father
who has made you able to share the lot of God’s holy people
and with them to inherit the light,
because of what he has done.
It is he who has rescued us from the ruling force of darkness
and transferred us to the kingdom of the Son that he loves,
and in him we enjoy our freedom, the forgiveness of sin.

This is a prayer we can take line by line, stopping at any word or phrase which we find particularly meaningful or relevant to our own life and just stop there for a while - or even make that word or phrase the subject of our whole prayer.

Some comments on phrases used in the prayer:

The knowledge of his will: scriptural knowledge is not merely the possession of facts, knowing a lot about the Bible. Rather, knowledge and wisdom in the Bible are concerned with the inner meaning of every passage and how it touches on living a Christ-filled life.

The lot of God’s holy people: The ‘lot of the saints’ (lit. hagioi, ‘holy ones’) is what all holy people are to inherit, i. e. the ‘salvation’ that originally had been thought of as a bequest made exclusively to the Chosen People of Israel. Now, with the coming of Jesus, non-Jews are called to share it.

To inherit the light: symbolises holiness, truth, love, glory and life. Accordingly, God, Christ and the Christian are all characterised by light. The “kingdom of light” is the opposite of the “dominion of darkness”.

Kingdom: does not here refer to a territory but to the authority, rule or sovereign power of a king (Greek, basileia, meaning ‘reign’ or ‘kingship’). Here it means that the Christian is no longer under the dominion of evil (darkness) but under the loving rule of God’s Son. To be in the ‘Kingdom’ is to be closely united to God in being the kind of person he wants to us to be and to be in cooperative union with others who are also that kind of person.

What more could we ask for than a full knowledge of God’s will and to be filled with wisdom and spiritual insight? It is a prayer we need to make in some form every day of our lives. Only then will we “lead a life worthy of the Lord and pleasing to him in every way”.

Let us then today thank God for all that he has done for us through Jesus Christ and the Christian community to which we belong.

Let us pray that we grow in knowledge and wisdom and insight so that we may love and serve him more and more.

GOSPEL (Luke 5:1-11)

This is Luke’s version of the first call of Jesus’ disciples. It differs significantly from the parallel versions in Mark and Matthew and is a combination of passages from Mark and John.

We are told that Jesus was standing by the shore of Lake Gennesaret. The other gospel writers call it the Sea of Galilee and John twice refers to it as the Sea of Tiberias.

Because of the large crowds pressing in on him to hear the word of God, Jesus was forced to borrow one of two boats moored near the shore where their owners were washing their nets.”He got into one of the boats, the one belonging to Simon” and “remaining seated, he continued to teach the crowds from the boat”. As we saw in the synagogue at Nazareth (and also in the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew), sitting was the usual teaching position. From a practical point of view, by preaching from the boat Jesus could avoid the pressure of the crowd and yet be close enough to speak to them.

It is a simple, straightforward statement and yet there is a symbolism here. Jesus gets into Simon’s boat and teaches from it. The boat, in the Gospel, is frequently a symbol of the church community. It is very meaningful to say that Jesus stepped into that boat, that it was Peter’s boat, and that he taught from there. It is a symbol of what is to come in the near future.

Now comes the lesson and the revelation. At the end of the teaching, Simon is told to go out into the deep water and start fishing. (He will not be called Peter until the next chapter.) “Master, we have been hard at it all night long and have caught nothing; but if you say so, I will lower the nets.” There is here something of the condescension of the expert towards the amateur.”We know there are no fish there but, just to make you happy, we’ll let down the nets.”

But their nets were hardly in the water when they were so full of fish that they were on the point of breaking. They (Peter and those others with him in the boat) had to call their companions in the other boat to come to their help (they do not seem to have caught any fish; only Simon’s boat does). But the two boats together were now so full of fish that they were on the point of sinking.

Peter, just now so arrogant and all-knowing, is totally overcome. He knew there were no fish there. So there was only one explanation. The man standing before him was Someone very special: “Go away from me, Lord, I am a sinful man.” It is the reaction of a person in the awful presence of God’s overwhelming power and goodness. We see similar reactions by Abraham (Gen 18:27), Job (42:6) and Isaiah (6:5).

Peter did not belong there; the expert realises he is nothing in the presence of this man. Instead, he becomes so aware of his shortcomings. Paradoxically, it is the saints who are most ready to acknowledge their sinfulness. And his companions, James and John, were equally amazed. There is no mention of Andrew in this version of the story because he would have been in his brother Peter’s boat. And the passage indicates that Peter was not alone in the boat (“We have worked hard all night. . .”)

Some commentators feel that Luke may have borrowed this story from John’s account of the disciples going fishing at the end of that gospel. It has been noted that Simon calls Jesus ‘Lord’, a post-resurrection title and refers to his sinfulness, which makes more sense after his triple denial during the Passion. It also looks forward to Peter’s leadership which is confirmed in the same chapter of John.

Jesus then reassures Simon and his companions: “Do not be afraid.” They are words they will hear again. Because he is calling them to be his partners in the work of building his Kingdom. The huge catch of fish made by the boat in which Jesus and Peter were is a sign of a much greater catch of people to be made by the new community led by the Spirit of Jesus and under the leadership of Peter.

Unlike the other gospels, Luke has a period of teaching and miracles precede the call of the disciples. This makes their unhesitating response less surprising and more plausible.

They heard the message, they accepted the call and “with that they brought their boats to land, left everything, and become his followers”. In Mark and Matthew they left their nets and boats. In Luke’s gospel especially, the following of Jesus is understood as absolute - one must leave everything and throw in one’s lot totally with Jesus wherever that will lead. Those boats and nets were the security on which the lives of Peter, his companions and their families depended. But they left them and everything else. This is faith, this is trust. Without it, the mission cannot succeed.

Week 22 | Friday

Readings - Colossians 1:15-20; Luke 5:33-39

FIRST READING (Colossians 1:15-20)

One of the main problems Paul was dealing with in writing to the Colossians concerned their ideas about angelic powers in the cosmos which threatened to push Christ into second place. Today we have Paul’s magnificent response, one of the most inspired passages in the New Testament which, as we shall see, has many echoes of John’s magisterial prologue on Jesus as the Word.

Originally, it was perhaps an early Christian hymn on the supremacy of Christ - used here by Paul to counteract the false teachings at Colossae. It is divided into two parts: 1, Christ’s supremacy in creation (vv. 15-17); 2, Christ’s supremacy in redemption (vv. 18-20).

The New American Bible gives the following evaluation of the passage:

Scholars raise the question whether Paul may not have adapted these verses from a Christian hymn or a Hellenistic wisdom poem. Whatever the case, the passage with all it lyricism is probably Paul’s. Its exalted Christology synthesises the growing awareness in New Testament times of Christ as man, Son of God, king and judge of the world, endowed with divine redemptive power, and containing in himself the fullness of that effective presence of God among humans which was first manifested in the Old Testament (cf. John 1:1-18). Whereas the human person is patterned after the image of God, being given a certain likeness to him (Gen 1:26ff), Christ is the actual likeness of God. Through faith, the remote reality of the Deity is rendered discernibly present in him and comprehensible to humans. He is the image of the invisible God (v. 15), in the sense that as a person he is supreme in every way over all creation. Christ’s supremacy requires not only that nothing appear in creation except in relation to him but also that he himself share in the creation of all things (v. 16). Such is his supremacy that he existed before creation came into being. It is to him that creation owes all that it has been, is, and will be (v. 17).

Christ cannot be anything but supreme over the whole church, which in any case is unthinkable and unrealisable without him (his body). Furthermore, because of his supremacy he was the first to be raised by God from the dead; and his resurrection placed him in full possession of headship over the community which he brought into being (v. 18). Since, as is clear from Christ’s role in creation (v. 16), the cosmos is dependent on him (v. 19), his death upon the cross has its effect on the whole of creation without exception, bringing it peace and uniting it to God (v. 20). Paul’s clear exposition of the supremacy of Christ was occasioned by the Colossians’ difficulties concerning the relationship of angelic spirits to the world. (NAB, edited)

Paul introduces two ways in which Christ can claim to be the ‘head’ of everything that exists: 1, he is the head of creation, of all that exists naturally, vv. 15-17 and 2, he is head of the new creation and of all that exists supernaturally through having been saved, vv. 18-20.

The subject of the poem is the pre-existing Christ, but considered only in so far as he was manifest in the unique historic person that is the Son of God made man, cf. Ph 2:5ff. It is as the incarnate God that Jesus is the ‘image of God’, i. e. his human nature was the visible manifestation of God who is invisible, cf. Rom 8:29ff, and it is as such, in his concrete human nature, and as part of creation, that Jesus is called the ‘first-born of creation’ - not in the temporal sense of having been born first, but in the sense of having been given the first place of honour.

Let us now go to the text of the reading. Christ, says Paul, is:

1, Christ’s supremacy in creation (vv. 15-17);

- the image of the invisible God: When we see and hear Jesus, we see and hear God, though veiled in the limitations of human form. The full glory of God cannot be seen in the humanity of Jesus.

In Heb 1:3 he is described as the “radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being”. This figure of the image suggests two truths: 1, God is invisible (“no one has ever seen God”, John 1:18); 2, Christ, who is the eternal Son of God and who became the God-man, reflects and reveals him to us (see also John 1:18; 14:9). Just as Moses had to veil his face when speaking to the Hebrews after conversing with Yahweh, so Jesus needs to veil his divine nature by his humanity so that we may have access to him. During the experience of the Transfiguration, the three disciples got a glimpse of the veil being briefly removed.

- the first-born of all creatures: “He was with God in the beginning” (John 1:1). As a member of the human race, he is first-born in dignity but not in time. Just as the firstborn son had certain privileges and rights in the biblical world, so also Christ has certain rights in relation to all creation - priority, pre-eminence and sovereignty (vv. 16-18).

- in him everything in heaven and on earth was created, things visible and invisible, whether thrones, ruling forces, sovereignties, powers - all things were created through him and for him.”Through him all things came to be, not one thing had its being but through him” (John 1:2). Here we have Paul’s refutation of the Colossians’ belief in cosmic powers. Everything that exists, however lofty and powerful, comes into being through Christ and goes back to God through him.

Seven times in six verses Paul mentions “all creation”, “all things” and “everything”, thus stressing that Christ is supreme over all.”Thrones, ruling forces, sovereignties, powers” refers to angels, and a hierarchy of angels figured prominently in the heretical beliefs of some Colossians. Here Paul clearly asserts that the angels have their origin from Christ as the Creative Word of God. They were created through him and for him. They bow down in worship before him.

- he exists is before all else that is: “In the beginning was the Word: the Word was with God and the Word was God” (John 1:1). He precedes all both in time and rank (cf. John 1:1-2) “Before Abraham came to be, I AM” (John 8:58).

- in him all things hold together: “All that came to be had life in him” (John 1:3). The continuing existence of every created thing totally depends on his creative and conserving power.

2, Christ’s supremacy in redemption(vv. 18-20)

- He is the Head of the Body, that is, the Church: “And God placed all things under his feet, appointed him to be the head over everything for the church, which is his Body” (Eph 1:22)

For Paul’s understanding of the church as Christ’s Body we may read 1 Cor 12:12ff. The church is the Body of the Risen Christ, in other words, it is through his Body that Christ remains visible to the world. It is through his Body that he continues to communicate his Good News of the Kingdom. For each one of us, both individually and especially collectively, it is a huge responsibility. And we can only fulfil our mission effectively in so far as we are totally united in mind, heart and spirit with the Head of the Body, Christ Jesus our Lord and with the Word he brought for the world.

- he is the Beginning, the first-born of the dead, so that he should be supreme in every way. Jesus comes before all, on earth and in the heavens. Nothing or no one comes before him in time or in rank. He is the Beginning, that is, of the new creation. He is the First-born, because he was the first to rise from the dead with a resurrected body. Elsewhere Paul calls him the “first fruits of those who have fallen asleep” (1 Cor 15:20). Others who were raised from the dead - the widow’s son raised to life by Elisha (2 Kings 4:35); widow’s son at Naim (Luke 7:15); Lazarus (John 11:44); Tabitha, raised to life by Peter (Acts 9:36-41); the boy who slept during one or Paul’s sermons, fell out of a window and died and then was restored to life by Paul (20:7-11) - all were raised only to die again.

- God wanted all fullness to be found in him: Jesus is the source of the fullness to which we all aspire, to be totally filled with the Spirit of Christ. ‘Fullness’ (pleroma) is a word rich in meaning when used by Paul. Originally it was part of the technical vocabulary of some Gnostic philosophies. In these systems it meant the sum of the supernatural forces controlling the fate of people. For Paul ‘fullness’ meant the totality of God with all his powers and attributes (2:9).

In this context, the exact meaning of the word pleroma (literally, the thing that fills up a gap or hole, like a patch, cf. Matt 9:16) is not certain here. Some writers have thought it must mean the same as in 2:9 (the fullness of divinity that filled Jesus), but since vv. 15-18 have already dealt with the divinity of Jesus, it seems likely that the reference here is to the biblical concept of the entire cosmos as filled with the creative presence of God.

This concept was also widespread in the Graeco-Roman world. Paul teaches that the incarnation and resurrection make Christ head not only of the entire human race, but of the entire created cosmos, so that everything that was involved in the fall is equally involved in the salvation. So, in Romans Paul writes: “The whole created world awaits the revelation of the children of God. . . all creation groans and is in agony even until now” (Rom 8:19,22).”The plan God was pleased to decree in Christ. . . namely, to bring all things in the heavens and on earth into one under Christ’s headship” (1 Cor 2:9-10).

- and through him to reconcile all things to him, everything in heaven and everything on earth: this is the work of Jesus, to bring reconciliation and healing where there is division. To bring together not only people but the whole of creation. This reconciliation of the whole universe (including angels as well as human beings) means, not that every single individual will be saved, but that all who are saved will be saved by their collective return to right order and the peace of perfect submission to God. This was the mission that Jesus gave to his disciples as he breathed his Spirit on them after the resurrection: “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive people’s sins, they are forgiven them; if you hold them bound, they are held bound.” In this scene the only mission given is to reconcile people with God and with each other in Christ. This is the work of the Kingdom, to bring all peoples and the whole of creation into peace and harmony based on truth, love and justice.

- making peace through Christ’s death on the cross: after all the triumphant language of the passage this comes as something of a surprising anticlimax but totally in keeping with the meaning of Christ. The peace and reconciliation that he brings is through the blood of the cross, the ultimate sacrifice of his humanity in love for his people and the world. This is what constitutes the real greatness of Christ. Because of his death on the cross, “God raised him high and gave him the name which is above all other names so that all beings in the heavens, on earth and in the underworld, should bend the knee at the name of Jesus and that every tongue should acclaim Jesus Christ as Lord, to the glory of God the Father” (Phil 2:9-11). We, too, are called to follow in his footsteps, ready to carry our cross for the sake of the Kingdom.”Blessed are the peacemakers, they shall be called children of God” (Matt 5:9).

The passage is extraordinarily rich in meaning and requires much time to be absorbed into the fabric of our thinking. It is both a profession of faith and the basis for very deep prayer.

GOSPEL (Luke 5:33-39)

The call of the first disciples is followed in Luke by the cure of a leper and then of a paralytic. Then there is the call of Levi (called Matthew in Matthew’s gospel) and the discussion with Jesus about his mixing with sinful and unclean people. It is the first of many confrontations between Jesus and the Jewish leaders.

We then come to today’s reading. Some scribes and Pharisees want to know why, when their disciples and those of John the Baptist regularly fast, Jesus’ disciples “eat and drink freely”. We know that John grew up in the desert and lived on an austere diet of locusts and wild honey. He also preached an austere penitential message and lived a highly disciplined life. The Pharisees also led a highly regimented and strict lifestyle. Jesus, however, together with his disciples, is frequently seen eating at the tables of Pharisees and tax collectors and in the houses of friends.

But, while Jesus rejected ostentatious fasting, we know he fasted (once for 40 days) and praised it together with prayer and almsgiving, provided it was done discreetly and not for display.

Jesus gives two answers to the question. First, he says that it is not appropriate for guests to fast when the bridegroom is still around. A Jewish wedding was and is a specially joyous occasion (plenty of wine needed, as we see in Cana) and it could last for a week. It would be unthinkable to fast at such a time. Here Jesus is the bridegroom. There will come a time when he is not physically with his disciples and then they will fast.

The second reason goes deeper and is presented in the form of a parable. One does not use a new piece of cloth to patch an old garment. At the first sign of stress, the new cloth will be stronger and the old cloth will be torn. Nor does one put new wine into old wineskins. The new wine is still fermenting and expanding. The old wineskins, which are made of goatskins, are already stretched and no longer flexible. When the new wine expands, the old wineskins will not be able to stretch any more and will burst. The result is lost wine and ruined wineskins. So new wine has to be poured into new wineskins.

In this Jesus is clearly saying that his whole vision of religion is new and it can only be accepted and adopted by people who are prepared to see things in a new way. His teaching, his vision cannot be grafted on to the old religion. The old religion emphasised externals like observance of legal and ritual regulations and fasting; Jesus emphasises the interior spirit which is the real measure of a person’s value.

This parable may also be read in conjunction with John’s account of the wedding feast at Cana where Jesus produced new and better wine from the water in the ritual washing jars.

Jesus knows the difficulties his adversaries face.”No one, after drinking old wine, wants new. He says, ‘I find the old wine better’.” Those who had grown up with the ‘old wine’ of the Mosaic Law would find it difficult to switch to the ‘new wine’ that Jesus was offering.

In our Church today there are many who still hanker for the ‘old wine’ of pre-Vatican II days. They have not made the inner shift which is necessary. They have not understood that Vatican II was much more than a change of external practices (such as have taken place in the liturgy). They nostalgically long for the Tridentine Mass in Latin and compare it favourably with the “new” liturgy which they find superficial and lacking in reverence. But they do not seem to have grasped the thinking which is behind the liturgical changes. The new patch does not fit their old cloth.”The old wine is better,” they say.

The new wine will not be appreciated until the wineskins are also changed; otherwise we are in the same situation as the Pharisees were with Jesus.

Week 22 | Saturday

Readings - Colossians 1:21-23; Luke 6:1-5

FIRST READING (Colossians 1:21-23)

This brief reading follows immediately on yesterday’s triumphant hymn in praise of Christ, head of all creation and head of his body, the Church.

Having said in yesterday’s passage that Christ had reconciled the whole world to himself and brought peace by his death on the cross, Paul reminds the Colossians that they themselves have experienced the reconciling effect of Christ’s death, and appeals to them to adhere firmly to him as their only mediator with God.

“You were once estranged and of hostile intent through your evil behaviour; now he has reconciled you, by his death and in that mortal body, to bring you before himself holy, faultless and irreproachable.”

Paul rejoices that the Colossians are among those who, once alienated from God by a pagan and sinful life, have now been reconciled and united with him through the death of Jesus. That “mortal body” is that of his Son (lit. ‘flesh body’). This provides the locus where reconciliation takes place. Into this body the entire human race is effectively gathered. This is beautifully put in the Letter to the Ephesians where it says that Jesus, through his death, broke down the divisions and brought peace and reconciliation between Jews and Gentiles, creating a single new Person (Eph 2:14ff). This work has to continue between peoples everywhere. Our world today is riven with divisions.

This state of peace and reconciliation will only continue “as long as you persevere and stand firm on the solid base of the faith”.

They can now stand before God “holy, pure and blameless”, provided they remain true to the foundation of their faith and keep close to the hope engendered by the Gospel message. It is a message that is extended to the whole world and Paul is its servant.

We, too, need to remain faithful to the Gospel message we have received through Christ and his Church. We, too, are called, like Paul, to be its servant and to be agents of peace and reconciliation in every area where we discern harmful divisions between peoples and groups.”Let there be peace on earth and let it begin with me.”

GOSPEL (Luke 6:1-5)

Yet another confrontation between Jesus and some Pharisees. Following immediately, as it does, after the parable about the patch and the wineskins, it confirms what Jesus said about the gap between the traditionalists and his vision.

He and his disciples were walking through a cornfield and it was a Sabbath day. The disciples were plucking heads of corn, rubbing them in their hands and eating them. The Sabbath did not forbid walking short distances. And custom did not forbid “gleaning”, that is, taking corn left over by reapers. It did forbid reaping and threshing. Only a very narrow-minded interpretation could have described plucking as reaping and rubbing between the hands as threshing but that seems to be what is happening here.

The disciples are asked, “Why are you doing something that is forbidden on the Sabbath day?” Jesus answers very quickly and to the point. He makes no reference to the narrow-minded legalism that his critics reveal, the “old wineskin” mentality. Instead, he throws at them an incident. David and his men were hungry so they went into the house of God and, with his approval, ate the holy bread which only the priests were allowed to eat (1 Sam 21:6). Each Sabbath, 12 loaves of fresh bread were set on a table in the Holy Place. The stale bread was eaten by the priests.

As king, David put himself above the law. Both David’s and the disciples’ actions involved godly men doing something forbidden by law. However, it is never a violation of a law to do what is good and to save life (eating for survival). In that sense both David and the disciples were within the spirit, though not the letter, of the law.

And Jesus, too, is above the law, “The Son of Man is master of the Sabbath.” Jesus has the authority to overrule man-made laws concerning the Sabbath, particularly as interpreted by the Pharisees. This does not mean, of course, that Jesus (or even God for that matter) can or will do anything he feels like doing. Jesus will never go against anything that involves the True or the Good; with his Father he is the Source of all that is true and good.

But many of the Jewish laws (like civil laws) are positive law. In themselves, they involve matters which are neither good nor bad. In itself, it is neither good nor bad to stop at a green light or go through a red one. It is neither good nor bad in itself to abstain from work on the Sabbath. What makes these acts good or bad is the deeper good of which they are a sign. That deeper good may sometimes involve their non-observance. Hunger and survival may over-ride a rule to fast. In a matter of extreme urgency it may be necessary to drive (safely) through a red light. The letter of the law is violated but not the good it intends.

Some manuscripts of Luke contain a very pertinent saying at this point: “On the same day, seeing a man working on the Sabbath day, Jesus said to him: ‘Friend, if you know what you are doing, you are blessed; but if you do not know, you are accursed as a breaker of the Law’.” (Jerusalem Bible, loc. cit.) That is a sentiment that goes with new wine and new wineskins.

If truth and goodness are not violated by doing or not doing something, can we way there is sin or evil there?

Week 23 | Monday

Readings - Colossians 1:24-2:3; Luke 6:6-11

FIRST READING (Colossians 1:24-2:3)

A story is told of a woman who went to one of Shakespeare’s plays for the first time. Asked her reaction, she responded: “It was full of quotations!”

Sometimes one gets the same feeling reading the letters of Paul. Scattered through what were simply letters to Christian communities with no thought that they would ever be part of the inspired word of God one comes across gems of sayings which have become the very fabric of our Christian culture and spirituality.

Right at the beginning of today’s reading we have such a gem. Jesus tells the Colossians,

It makes me happy to suffer for you,
as I am suffering now,
and in my own body to do what I can
to make up all the hardships
that still have to be undergone by Christ
for the sake of his body, the Church.

In his preaching of the Gospel to the Gentiles, Paul experienced all kinds of affliction, but here he is probably referring especially to the imprisonment he is experiencing at the present time.

In saying that, through his own sufferings, he is trying to make up what is lacking, he does not mean that there was a deficiency in the sacrifice of Christ.

Jesus suffered in order to establish the Kingdom of God and anyone who continues his work must share in this suffering. Paul is not saying that he thinks his own sufferings increase the value of the redemption (since that value cannot be increased). The sufferings of Christ were of infinite value and did not need to be filled. But Paul is saying that he shares by his sufferings as a missionary in those that Jesus had undergone in his own mission. These are the sufferings predicted for the messianic era, and are all part of the way in which God had always intended the Church to develop. Paul feels that being the messenger Christ has chosen to send to the pagans, he has been specially called on to experience these sufferings.

For Paul, too, the Body of the Risen Christ is his church. That Body continues to suffer and undergo hardships and Paul wants to share in these sufferings and identify with them - as all of us are called to do.

What a beautiful idea! Paul is in prison in Rome. He offers up his pain and sufferings and joins them to those of Christ that they may benefit the Body of the risen Christ, the whole Church.

In uniting his sufferings with those of Jesus, it is part of Paul’s sense of an extremely intimate closeness to Jesus. In a sense, all the sufferings that Christians have ever offered to God and have yet to offer may be seen as united as part of the sacrifice that Christ made on the cross. In a way, the work of redemption is made full by Christians identifying their own sufferings for the Gospel as the building blocks of the Kingdom.

His sufferings are for the church
of which I was made a servant
with the responsibility towards you
that God gave to me,
that of completing God’s message,
the message which was a mystery
hidden for generations and centuries
and has now been revealed to the saints, his holy people.

The meaning of ‘completing God’s message’ seems to be that the word of God is brought to completion, i. e. to its intended purpose, only when it is proclaimed (cf. Rom 10:13-15). Paul’s commission to bring the word to completion, therefore, required him to make the word of God heard in Colossae as well as in many other places. In doing so he is continuing what Jesus did on the cross. (We remember that Jesus said his followers would do more than he did - certainly in terms of spreading his Message.)

His role is to unfold that mystery which has been hidden from ages past but is now revealed to the ‘saints’, that is, the Christians. By ‘mystery’ he means not so much something that is difficult to understand but rather a secret which is only now being made known. The word ‘mystery’ was commonly used of some esoteric religions (sometimes called ‘mystery religions’) where only the initiates were given special knowledge denied to others.

The Church is not like that. What Paul means is that truths about God or God’s plans, hitherto unknown to the Gentiles, have been made known through Jesus Christ and are now being proclaimed to the whole world. Paul radically changes the original meaning of mystery by always combining it with words such as “unfold” (here), “made known” (Eph 1:9), “make plain” (Eph 3:9) and “revelation” (Rom 16:25). The Christian mystery is not secret knowledge for a few. It is a revelation of divine truths - once hidden but now openly proclaimed.

The ‘mystery’ he is referring to here is that extraordinary love of God which has been made known to us through the life, sufferings, death and resurrection of his incarnate Son Jesus and which Paul and his fellow evangelisers continue to unfold to those who have not yet heard.

“It was God’s purpose to reveal to the ‘saints’ how rich is the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles: it is Christ among you, your hope of glory.” The mystery is the fact that Christ now indwells in believing Gentiles, for it had not been previously revealed that the Gentiles would be admitted to the church on equal terms with Israel.

Previously, when it had seemed (to the Jews) that pagans could never be saved, as salvation was restricted to ‘Israel’, pagans had seemed to be without a Messiah and consequently to be deprived of all hope. The ‘mystery’ or secret of God that had now been revealed was that the pagans too were, and had been, all called to be saved through union with Christ, and so to reach eternal glory.

This is the Christ we are proclaiming,
admonishing and instructing everyone in all wisdom,
to make everyone perfect in Christ.

The Christ Paul proclaims is the wisdom which makes us perfect. ‘Perfect’ was a word used by the mystery religions and the Gnostics to describe those who had become possessors of the secrets or knowledge boasted of by the particular religion. But in Christ every believer is one of the perfect. The wisdom of the Christian is not (as the Gnostics believed) perfect knowledge but the Way of Jesus, the Way of the Cross, the Way of universal and unconditional Love, the Way of the Beatitudes, the Way of Service, the Way of Justice and Compassion. In other words, the vision of the Kingdom.

“And it is for this reason that I labour, striving with his energy which works in me mightily.” Paul puts all his effort into his work for the Gospel but it really is “his” (i. e. Christ’s) energy which produces the results. As Paul says elsewhere, “when I am weak, then I am strong”.

And he wants the Colossians to know how much he is struggling on their behalf and also for the Christians of nearby Laodicea and other places he had not visited. Laodicea (modern Pamukkale) was about 17 km from Colossae and this letter was intended for both towns. Paul had not been to either place but was fully aware of the problems the Christians were facing in each one. His concern for them is no less because of that.

Finally, the reading ends with another lovely passage in which Paul says that his purpose is

to bind them together in love
and to encourage their resolution
until they are rich in assurance
of their complete understanding
and have knowledge of the mystery of God,
in which all the jewels of wisdom and knowledge are hidden.

In the mystery of God is revealed what till then had been ‘hidden’, namely the ‘infinite wisdom’ of God. That it is Christ who is revealed in the mystery is of course true, and he himself is also the Wisdom of God and he is also the Mystery that is hard to understand.

Paul also stresses knowledge in this letter because he was refuting a heresy that emphasised knowledge as the means of salvation (Gnosticism). Paul insists that the Christian, not the Gnostic, is the one who possesses genuine knowledge about the meaning of life.

These are the ‘mysteries’ which are now being made known, “in which all the jewels of wisdom and knowledge are hidden”. This wisdom is within the reach of even the simplest person. It requires not a massive intellect but an open heart.

GOSPEL (Luke 6:6-11)

Immediately following the incident of plucking the grains in the cornfield, we have another confrontation with religious leaders also on a Sabbath day. This one is even nastier as it involves what is called in American police movies a “set up” or “entrapment”.

Jesus had gone into the local synagogue, as was his practice on the Sabbath, and began to teach. Right in front of him was a man with a withered hand, no doubt something he was born with. There were scribes and Pharisees in the congregation and, we are told, they “were watching him” to see whether he would heal the man on a Sabbath day so that they could accuse him of breaking the Law.

Medical work was forbidden on the Sabbath because it normally took time. Jesus, of course, healed with just a word but even if he did not, could one say that healing was against the spirit of the Sabbath? At the same time, it is also worth noting that the man was suffering from a chronic and probably non-painful disability. There was no need for him to be cured on the spot; it could easily have waited until the next day.

That gives further point to Jesus’ argument. The poor man had clearly been “planted”. He was being used as bait for their sinister ends. For the Pharisees and their co-conspirators the man and his plight were secondary. They had to prove their point and he was seen as a useful tool.

Jesus, of course, is fully aware of what is going on. He speaks directly to the disabled man: “Rise up and stand out in the middle!” The command to “rise up” is already an indication of what is going to take place; the man is going to be given new life. Nor is there any secrecy. What Jesus is going to do is to be seen by all.

But first he puts a question to the whole congregation, scribes and Pharisees included: “Is it lawful on the Sabbath day to do good, or to do evil? to save life or to destroy it?”

It is really an unanswerable question because the answer is so obvious. But it was not the way these Pharisees were thinking. Their question would be very different: “Is it right to obey the Law or to violate it?” For them the Law, even the letter of the Law, was paramount. There is an irony in Jesus’ question because Jesus is planning to bring healing into a man’s life while they were preparing to bring about his destruction. Who was really breaking the Sabbath?

Not so with Jesus. For him the Law was relative to the true and the good. No implementation of a law can offend the true and the good. And sometimes the following of the true and the good may have to go against the letter of the law. What is legal is not always moral. It can be immoral, that is, evil, to obey a law in certain circumstances. What is moral sometimes transcends the law and may even contradict the law.

Hearing no dissenting answer, Jesus says to the man, “Stretch out your hand.” He did so. His arm was fully restored to normal.

The scribes and Pharisees were furious and began to plot against Jesus. Their plans had been brought to nought. They showed no pleasure that a crippled man had been made whole. Their interpretation of the law had been shown to be wanting and they had to get back at Jesus.

Such situations are by no means unknown in our Christian life and in our Church. We will run into situations where doing good may be in conflict with traditional regulations and legal formulae.

We will find ourselves in situations where contemporary Pharisees will try to put the Church into a straitjacket of narrow-mindedness and fundamentalism whether it involves our understanding of the Scripture or the liturgy or morality or something else. These are people who put the letter of the laws, regulations and rubrics before love. For them it is more important to observe the externals of rules than to be a loving person.

Week 23 | Tuesday

Readings - Colossians 2:6-15; Luke 6:12-19

FIRST READING (Colossians 2:6-15)

We come now to the instruction part of the letter with some warnings against errors into which the Colossians were reported to be falling. As we saw in yesterday’s reading, they were apparently being carried away by a fascination with various cosmic powers and angelic forces.

Paul begins by telling the Colossians that, since they have received Jesus as their Lord and Christ (Messiah), their lives should totally rooted in him and built on him. They will be held firm by the faith which was passed on to them and they should be filled with expressions of thanksgiving.

But then comes the warning. They are to make sure that they are not made captive by the lure of some kind of ‘philosophy’, a set of ideas that comes from humans and which is based on the principles of the world but not on Christ. To deny or abandon Christ after he has liberated them from the tyranny of ‘darkness’ by going back to error is nothing else than to undergo a new slavery.

As he did, earlier Paul goes on to refute the ideas with which the Colossians had been toying, the idea that the world was governed by cosmic angels of some kind.

It is in Christ and only in him, in bodily form, that the divinity lives in all its fullness. The word pleroma here is defined as the ‘divinity’ that is now ‘filling’ Christ in his human body: in other words, the risen Christ, through his incarnation and resurrection, unites together the divine and the created. In this way he himself is the pleroma of all possible categories of created being.

And it is in Christ, too, that the Colossians find their own fulfilment, in the One who is the head of every sovereignty and ruling force. A Christian shares this pleroma of Christ by being part of it, i. e. part of Christ’s body, and as a consequence of this he is raised to be higher than even the highest grade of angel.

Paul then reminds them, too, that they have been circumcised but with a special kind of circumcision. Here he is likely speaking to the Jewish Christians. There may have been some backsliding on their part and others coming under the influence of Jewish proselytisers emphasising the importance of circumcision. The same problem is dealt with in the letter to the Galatians.

Christian ‘circumcision’ is one performed not by human hands, where a piece of skin is removed, but “by the complete stripping of your natural self”. It is the total giving of oneself to Christ, to God; the complete letting go of the natural self.

This is circumcision according to Christ and it is sacramentally celebrated through baptism.”You have been buried with him by your baptism.” Baptism was done by the catechumen taking off his clothes, being fully immersed in a pool and then emerging and putting on a white garment. It was a re-enacting of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus himself and an expression of total identity with him. Through that baptism

you have been buried with him;
by which, too, you have been raised up with him
through your belief in the power of God
who raised him from the dead.

Then, speaking to the Gentile Christians, Paul says: “You were dead [spiritually], because you were sinners and had not been circumcised; he has brought you to life with him, he has forgiven us all our sins.” Through our faith, that is, through our total commitment to Jesus, we are reconciled and made one with him. No physical circumcision can bring about this.

Prior to that, they were dead but now “Christ has brought you to life with him, he has forgiven us every one of our sins”. The Colossians - both Jewish and Gentiles - are now liberated from their debt to the Law; it no longer governs their lives. This liberation was brought about by that debt being wiped out by nailing it to the cross.

The Law was able to do nothing about a sinner except condemn him to death, this death sentence is what God has carried out on his own Son in order to suppress it for the rest of the world and it was for this very reason that God’s Son was ‘made sin’, ‘subject to the Law’, and ‘cursed’ by the Law. In the person of his Son, whom he allowed to be executed, God nailed up and destroyed our death warrant, as well as all the charges it made against us.

Finally, “Christ has stripped the sovereignties and the ruling forces, and paraded them in public, behind him in his triumphal procession”.

The tradition was that the Law had been brought down to Moses by angels, and by honouring them as the lawgivers, people became distracted from the true Creator. Now that God has brought the regime of that Law to an end, by means of the crucifixion, these angelic powers have also lost the one thing that had given them power, and they too must acknowledge that Christ has triumphed over them.

Once again Paul demonstrates that Christ is supreme in sovereignty and the angels and all other cosmic powers are subservient to him.

Christ, then, as we saw earlier, is the head of all created things and the head of his people, his body, the Church. Before him everyone must bow.

For us, it is important that we not be misled by fads and fashions which can come into our society or into our church. The problems the Colossians had can be found practically everywhere in the Church and society today. We have the paradox of an agnostic worship of science combined with an obsession with ‘New Age’ and all its eccentricities.

It is so important to realise and to experience that the Gospel in its purity is a genuine source of freedom because it touches the deepest aspirations of the human spirit. Many sects and elitist groups both within and outside the Church, however attractive, do not normally increase our inner freedom; often quite the contrary.

GOSPEL (Luke 6:12-19)

We move on now to a different phase in Luke’s story and some very crucial sayings of Jesus.

Jesus, we are told, went up into the mountains to pray and spent the whole night there in prayer to God. Some might wonder what Jesus would have to pray about. Such a question may reveal a limited concept of what prayer is. It is not just a question of asking for things. It is even less a question of fulfilling a religious duty, “saying our prayers”.

Prayer is ultimately making contact with God, the beginning and end of all things. It makes a lot of sense that Jesus would have wanted to be in intimate contact with his Father and to have spent long periods with him. One of Jesus’ main concerns was that he do the will of his Father. Prayer was one way of making sure that there was completely harmony with that will.

Luke’s gospel shows Jesus at prayer more than any of the others. He also shows Jesus praying before all the important stages in his public life. As soon as this period of prayer was over, he called together his disciples and from them he chose twelve as apostles.

We know that among those who came to hear Jesus was a group, comprising both men and women, who regularly followed him and were committed to his teachings. Elsewhere we know of 72 such disciples who were sent out on a mission to do what Jesus was doing. After the ascension, we are told of 120 believers waiting for the coming of the Spirit. It is from these that Jesus chooses 12 to be Apostles, with a special mandate to continue his mission for the Kingdom. Although the order of names varies in the different gospels, the list is always headed by Peter while Judas is placed last.

We can sometimes be rather casual in our use of the terms ‘disciples’ and ‘apostles’ but they have very distinct meanings. The word ‘disciple’ is applied to any person who commits himself to be a follower of Jesus. The word ‘disciple’ comes from a word which means ‘to learn’. There is a passive element present, in the sense of the disciple sitting at the feet of the guru and learning from him. Jesus’ disciples regularly called him ‘Rabbi’ or teacher. ‘Apostle’ however has a much more active meaning. It refers to a person who goes out as an emissary, delegated to pass on information or commands or instructions to others on behalf of some authority.

In the Gospel, the word ‘apostle’ first applies to the twelve people who were especially chosen by Jesus to hand on his message. They would, after the departure of Jesus, become the foundation stones of the new community. In them would be invested the integrity of the original message and it would be up to them to interpret its acceptable developments. They were the beginnings of what we call today the “magisterium”, the teaching body of the Church responsible for the maintenance of the integrity of the Gospel message.

In this, as in all the lists of the Apostles, the first person listed is Simon, whose name is now changed to Peter. (In Matthew, the change is made at Peter’s confession of Jesus as Messiah, Matt 16:18.) There are variations of the Apostles’ names in all the lists. Bartholomew here seems to be the same as Nathanael in John (cf. 1:45) and is associated with Philip. Matthew seems to correspond to Levi (cf. Mark 2:13ff.). James, son of Alphaeus, is probably the same as James the younger, not the brother of John (Mark 15:40). The other Simon is called a Zealot. This could be either to describe his religious zeal or indicate his membership in the party of the Zealots, a Jewish revolutionary group violently opposed to Roman rule. Judas, the son of James is another name for Thaddaeus (Matt 10:3; Mark 3:18). Also known as Jude to distinguish him from the other Judas, who always appears last in the lists. ‘Iscariot’ may mean that he comes from Kerioth. The town Kerioth Hezron was about 19 km south of Hebron and appears in the Old Testament (Joshua 15:25; Jeremiah 48:24).

We know, of course, that one of the chosen failed utterly and betrayed his Master. He was replaced by Matthias. Later, too, Paul - who never saw the pre-resurrection Jesus - would be called to be an Apostle. And the term would also be applied to a few others in the New Testament, e. g. Barnabas, a missionary colleague of Paul.

Secondly, however, the word ‘apostle’ applies to every baptised Christian. All of us, one way or another, are called to pass on the Gospel message so that others can hear and respond. There are many ways we can do this. One thing, though, is clear; it is not enough for us to be simply disciples, passive followers.

Immediately following the call of the Twelve comes what is really Luke’s version of the Sermon on the Mount. Significantly, for him it is going to take place in a plain, down on the ground in the midst of all the people. So his version is sometimes known as the “Sermon on the Plain”. It somehow indicates the humility of Jesus and his closeness to the people while Matthew uses the more biblical concept of a mountain as the place where God reveals himself.

Jesus is surrounded by all his disciples, his newly chosen apostles, and a huge crowd from Judea and Jerusalem, from the sea coast of Tyre and Sidon, including both Jews and non-Jews. They all came to listen to Jesus and to be healed. And they were all eager to touch him physically because a certain power went out from Jesus and brought healing to all.

Let us then hear today the call of Jesus, first to be his disciples, totally committed to accepting and assimilating his message; second, to accepting the responsibility to spread the Gospel actively through the way we live our lives, through the way we speak, and through the relationships we establish with people; thirdly, let us reach out and touch Jesus so that we may experience his healing wherever we need it.

Week 23 | Wednesday

Readings - Colossians 3:1-11; Luke 6:20-26

FIRST READING (Colossians 3:1-11)

Just before our reading begins, Paul had been warning the Colossians against false beliefs and practices. These involved the observance of ‘New Moons’ and ‘Sabbaths’. He tells them not to be misled by people who choose “to grovel to angels. . . pinning every hope on visions received”.

Such people, he says, have no connection with “the Head [Christ], by which the whole Body [the church], given all that it needs and held together by its joints and sinews, grows with the growth given by God”. Their lives are being governed by all kinds of rules and petty regulations which are merely ‘human commandments and doctrines’ - “Do not pick up this, do not eat that, do not touch something else.” It is not unusual for some Christians today to become obsessed with these kinds of trivialities and miss the big picture - working with Christ to build the Kingdom of God on earth.

Having warned the Colossians about the futility of all kinds of external, ritualistic observances which it seems they were getting involved in, Paul asks them to focus on just one thing - Christ.”Since you have been raised up to be with Christ, you must look for the things that are above, where Christ is, sitting at God’s right hand.”

There are two interlocking elements in today’s reading: the first deals with the believer’s relationship with Christ, and the second speaks of the behaviour which should naturally follow from that relationship.

As to the believers’ position in Christ: they are as dead; they have been raised with Christ; they are already with Christ in heaven (“hidden with Christ”); they have “taken off the old self” and have “put on the new self” .

The second element speaks of how the believers are to behave as a result: they are to set their heart (or mind) on things above; they are to put to death practices that belong to their earthly nature; and they are to rid himself of practices that characterise their unredeemed self. In summary, they are called upon to become in their daily experiences what they are in essence through their vocation in Christ.

Hence, their thoughts are to be on things above, not on the things that are on the earth. This is not a literal looking up to ‘heaven’ but rather that the thinking that guides their actions is solidly rooted in all that God stands for. They are not to identify themselves with the “world”, that part of our experience which is remote from or opposed to God’s way.

And the reason Paul gives is because “you have died and the life you have now is hidden with Christ in God”. They have not literally died but all links with whatever is opposed to Christ have died in them. They are “hidden with Christ” in the sense that their whole being is totally immersed in the person and the vision of Christ and that brings them into close relationship with God. That is the ideal, of course; it takes a lifetime to make it a reality in practice.

And when Christ in his fullness and glory is revealed and, because we have become fully identified with him, then we too will be revealed together with him in glory. Through union with Christ in baptism, his followers already live the identical life he lives in heaven; we have already risen with him, but this spiritual life is not yet manifest and glorious as it will be at the Parousia.

Our identity with Christ - which includes both Christ’s gift to us of his life and our positive response to his call - must result in a way of life that is totally in harmony with that identity. So Paul now warns the Colossians of the kind of behaviour which should have no part in a Christian’s life.

“You must kill everything in you that is earthly: sexual vice, impurity, uncontrolled passion, evil desires and especially greed, which is the same thing as worshipping a false god; it is precisely these things which draw God’s retribution on those who resist.” He highlights ‘greed’ as a form of idolatry. Perhaps it is the main idol that is worshipped in the prosperous parts of the world today. The obsession with ownership and the power and status that ownership brings. The constant urge to buy, buy, buy things we have no need of. Our new temples (packed on Sundays) are our shopping malls.

On one level, our union with the Risen Christ, our sharing in his death and resurrection through baptism is immediate and total, but at the practical level of life on earth, this union has to be grown into gradually and we do that by ridding ourselves of the kind of behaviour Paul mentions. Paul has said that we are already “dead” in Christ, “hidden with Christ in God” but, on the practical level, that dying and being reborn is something that we have to work on every day, by “killing” the old and sinful self.

And then he gives some more examples of the things the Colossians need to die to, behaviour which marked their pre-Christian lives but which now should be removed from their life: human anger, hot temper, malice, abusive language and dirty talk, lying to each other. . . As the French say, ‘Plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose’. All the examples Paul mentions are found every day in our TV screens and played out in people’s lives.

With the abandoning of the old pre-Christian self, there must also be the abandonment of the old ways of doing and relating.”You have stripped off your old behaviour with your old self.” Just as one takes off dirty clothes and puts on clean ones, so Christian are called upon to renounce their evil ways and live in accordance with the ways of Christ’s kingdom.

Instead “you have put on a new self which will progress towards true knowledge the more it is renewed in the image of it Creator.” The human race, that was to have been in the ‘image of God’ (Gen 1:26), lost its way outside and apart from the will of God and became the slave of sin and sinful urges. This is the ‘old self (anthropos,) that must die; the ‘new self’ is reborn in Christ, who is the true image of God and, in his humanity, the true image of what it is to be human.

And, when we have taken on this ‘new self’, this new way of being fully human, there can be no room for “distinction between Greek and Jew, between the circumcised and the uncircumcised, or between barbarian and Scythian, slave and free”. ‘Barbarians’ were those who did not speak Greek and hence were deemed uncivilised; Scythians, who came originally from what is now southern Russia, were known especially for their brutality and considered by other peoples as little better than wild animals. In many ways, this understanding of humanity was a huge advance in human relations.

There can then be only one conclusion: “There is only Christ: he is everything and he is in everything.” Christ is in all and above all. He is the paradigm for all human thinking and acting and relating. It is the central theme of the whole letter. Christ is the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. He is the Word of God to be listened to and followed.”Those that have ears let them hear.” All lesser ‘gods’ need to be abandoned. We all have our lesser gods. What are mine?

Christ is our Lord and he is also our Brother and his Father is the Father of every single person. Hence, the new creation will not be divided into races and religions and cultures and social classes in the way the present creation has been since the Fall. Christ transcends all barriers and unifies people from all cultures, races and nations. Such distinctions are no longer significant; Christ alone matters.

Again, that is the ideal but, in the 2,000 years since these words were written, we have still such a long way to go. And, far from being the model of unity we are called to be, Christians themselves are deeply divided, contemptuous and unaccepting of each other. Charlie Brown put it very well many years ago: “I love mankind; it’s people I can’t stand.” In church, we profess a great love for all mankind. What happens with all those people we bump into in the street?

Clearly this reading gives much room for personal and community reflection. It is as relevant to us, wherever we are today, as it was for the Christians of Colossae and Laodicea.

GOSPEL (Luke 6:20-26)

Today we begin what is known as Luke’s ‘Sermon on the Plain’ which more or less parallels Matthew’s Sermon on the Mount. Luke’s is much shorter but both begin with the Beatitudes and end with the parable of the house builders. Some of what is found in Matthew’s Sermon is found elsewhere in Luke as Matthew’s ‘Sermon’ it consists of disparate sayings of Jesus gathered into one place. Luke also omits Matthew’s specifically Jewish material which would not have been relevant to his Gentile readers.

The Sermon can be summarised as follows:

An introduction of blessings and woes (20-26)

The love of one’s enemies (27-36)

The demands of loving one’s neighbour (37-42)

Good deeds as proof of one’s goodness (43-45)

A parable on listening to and acting on the words of Jesus (46-49).

Similar to Matthew’s Sermon on the Mount, Luke begins the Sermon on the Plain with his version of the Beatitudes. But there are striking differences. Whereas Matthew has eight (some would say seven) Beatitudes, Luke has four “Blesseds” and four contrasting “Woes”. As is typical of his uncompromising style when it comes to following Jesus, the language of Luke is much more direct and hard-hitting and it may well be closer to what Jesus actually said.

Matthew’s Beatitudes propose a set of attitudes which reflect the spirit of the Kingdom, qualities to be found in the truly Christian and human life. Luke, on the other hand, speaks of material conditions in this life which will be overturned. Later in this gospel, this is illustrated graphically in the story of the rich man and Lazarus (16:25).

Luke also has Jesus speak in the second person: “Blessed are you” and “Woe to you” rather than in the third person as Matthew does (“Blessed are those who. . .”). Nor does he speak of the “poor in spirit” but of “you who are poor” and he certainly means the materially poor.

He goes on to say how blessed too are “you who are hungry; you who weep; you who are hated and who are rejected and marginalised and whose name is regarded as evil” because of their connection with Jesus. Undoubtedly Matthew’s Beatitudes can be read to consider just ‘spiritual’ poverty and a hunger for ‘righteousness’, which in fact are also a form of real poverty and real hunger but Luke is a gospel for the materially poor and distressed and we must be careful not to turn our focus away from them. That is why he has Jesus born in poverty and dying naked and destitute (even of his ‘friends’).

Jesus tells those who are poor and hungry and abused to rejoice when that happens and “dance for joy”. There are two reasons:

because their reward will be “great in heaven” and

because that is the way the prophets in the past were treated (and the way Jesus the Prophet will also be treated).

At a first reading, it seems like a classical example of religion as the ‘opium of the people’: Be happy that you are having such a hard time now because there is a wonderful future waiting for you in the next world. It was the message that Karl Marx mocked the capitalist-ruled churches of preaching to the exploited ‘proletariat’.

And the second part is not likely to go down well in our contemporary developed world.””Woe to you who are rich [he can’t be serious!], you have received your comfort already.” “Woe to you who are full, because you will be hungry; woe to you who laugh now, for you shall mourn and weep; woe to you who are spoken well of. That is how they treated the false prophets.”

How are we to understand these sayings which turn our common worldview upside down? I think they have to be seen in the light of the Kingdom, in the kind of society that Jesus came to set up, a society based on mutual love and sharing and support. A Kingdom for this world and not just the next. The coming of such a society could only be good news for the poor and destitute (material and otherwise), for those suffering from hunger (physical and otherwise), for those depressed by deep sorrow and for those abused and rejected for their commitment to Jesus and his Way.

On the other hand it would not be good news for those self-focused people who amass material wealth at the expense of others, who indulge in excessive consumption of the world’s goods, who live lives centred on personal hedonism and pleasure, and who feed off the envy and adulation of those around them. There is really no place for such people in the Kingdom. To enter fully into the Kingdom they have to unload all these concerns and obsessions and let go. Instead of focusing on what they can get; they will focus on what they can share of what they have.

A clear example is of the rich young man in the Gospel. How rich he was - and yet how sad he was! Compare him with Zacchaeus, whom we will be meeting later on.

Week 23 | Thursday

Readings - Colossians 3:12-17; Luke 6:27-38

FIRST READING (Colossians 3:12-17)

Today we have the final reading from this Letter and it is a continuation of yesterday’s reading. After warning against some negative behaviour in yesterday’s passage, Paul makes some beautiful statements today on the kind of people the Colossian Christians should be.

The Colossians are “the chosen of God, the holy people whom he loves” and, because of that, they are to be clothed in compassion, generosity, humility, gentleness and patience. When they “put on” Christ at their baptism, all these qualities also needed to be part of what they “wore”.

Israel were the original Chosen People but now the Christian community shares this name. Being chosen by God is a constant theme in Paul’s letter but the Scriptures never teach that our being chosen frees us from being responsible for our behaviour. We will not be saved against our will.

On the contrary, as Paul says here, it is precisely because Christians have been chosen for eternal salvation that they must exert every effort (with God’s grace) to live a life in harmony with example set by Christ. For Paul, divine kingship and human responsibility go hand in hand.

They are, he says, God’s “holy people”, his ‘saints’ (hagioi). By that he does not mean that they are all canonisable; that was clearly not the case. The word ‘saint’ was applied to the Christians in general. Their holiness was less a matter of their own efforts than their having been sanctified through Baptism and their incorporation in the Christian community. They were ‘holy’ by reason of their being called, being chosen.”I have chosen you, you have not chosen me,” as Jesus told his disciples at the Last Supper. The word hagios also implies someone who is different, set apart from the common crowd. Christians, by their lifestyle, are called to act as a counter-witness to the prevailing values of most societies - the salt of the earth, the leaven in the dough.

Frictions, divisions and disunity can never be totally avoided but Paul says they must be dealt with by a high level of tolerance and acceptance of others and a readiness for forgiveness and reconciliation. The reason is simple: “The Lord has forgiven you; now you must do the same.” The Gospel has much to say on this - Peter being told to forgive 70 times 7 times and the parable of the unforgiving servant; the command to love our enemies, to pray for them and bless them. . .

And so, the most important, the all-enveloping article of clothing must be love, “the perfect bond”. Love is the central commandment. The “new” commandment is that we love each other as Christ has loved us and the greatest love is to give one’s life for one’s friends. With this in place, everything else - absolutely everything else - is taken care of.

If all this is done, then the next prayer is likely to become a reality: “May the peace of Christ reign in your hearts, because it was for this that you were called together in one Body.” Once we are totally united with Christ and his way of living, then we are where we belong, we are responding to the deepest needs of our being - the result can only be a sense of inner peace and harmony, even if all round us there are storms. (That surely is the meaning of the story of the disciples in the boat with Jesus in a stormy sea. With Jesus in the boat there came a great calm.)

And when that peace comes, let us also be thankful. Gratitude is a sentiment that must surface constantly in the Christian heart as gifts are piled on us one after the other, beginning with the very gift of life and the gift of the Good News about Jesus. Our most important act together is the celebration of the Eucharist. The word means ‘thanks’.

In the final part of the reading, Paul speaks about how the Colossians should pray and worship together:

- Let the Word of Christ, in all its richness, find a home in you.

This refers especially to Christ’s teaching, which in the time of the Colossians was still being transmitted orally. By implication and, especially for us, it includes the Old and the New Testaments. It is a sad fact that, for so many Catholics, the Word of Christ in the Scriptures does not find a home in their lives. For so long the teaching Church was so wary of ‘private interpretation’ that Catholics were discouraged from reading even the Gospel. It is a situation which urgently needs to be remedied and these commentaries on the daily Mass readings are intended to be a small contribution in that direction.

- Teach each other, and advise each other, in all wisdom.

What we need is not just knowledge or information about our faith but the wisdom which comes from deep insight into its meaning for our lives. There is also a wisdom in the whole group, which individuals do not have.

Again, for so many Catholics, ‘teaching’ is what goes on in school under the heading of ‘religious knowledge’ but long experience has shown that it all too often does very little to build up a deep faith and sense of belonging in the Christian community. It is often totally divorced from both family and parish life. In more recent times, there have been movements towards more ‘faith sharing’ and ‘Bible sharing’. The whole of the liturgical experience, too, and not just the homily, should be a mutually teaching experience of what it means to belong to a Christian community.

- With gratitude in your hearts sing psalms and hymns and inspired songs to God.

Some of the most important doctrines were expressed in Christian hymns preserved for now only in Paul’s letters.”Psalms” could also describe a song newly composed for Christian worship (cf. 1 Cor 14:26, where ‘hymn’ is literally ‘psalm’ in the Greek text). A “hymn” was a song of praise, especially used in a celebration, much like the Old Testament psalms that praised God for all that he is. A “song” recounted the acts of God and praised him for them, much like the Old Testament psalms that thanked God for all that he had done.”Inspired songs” could be charismatic improvisations suggested by the Spirit during liturgical assembly.

Paul here is expressing our need to come together to pray and share our faith and to praise and give thanks to our God and Jesus his Son. Again, this is something to be done in a genuinely communal spirit of celebration and prayer and not merely as the carrying out of a command or obligation by an individual. For us, it concerns the way we conduct our liturgies, especially that of the Eucharist.

For congregations where the vast majority could not read or write, songs were an important part of worship and prayer and that is probably the same in some parts of the world today. Literacy has had the very negative effect, again in mainly Catholic circles, of reducing the role of music and song in our worship, especially where the active participation of the congregation is concerned. Yet, someone said very truly that “he who sings prays twice”. One has only to attend Masses where there is no music and those where the whole congregation sings (and even dances) to appreciate the difference. It is time we took Paul’s advice more to heart.

Paul sums up his exhortation by urging that “whatever you say or do, let it be in the name of the Lord Jesus, in thanksgiving to God the Father through him”. In our liturgies, every prayer we make to the Father is made “through Jesus Christ, your Son, who lives and reigns forever and ever”.

Every single thing we Christians do is done for him. All is for the greater glory of God. We try to seek and find and respond to him in every experience, in every person we meet. We wish that our every thought, intention, action and response be directed solely to the praise and service of our Lord. Let us learn to be aware that every moment, every happening of our day is a sacred point of contact with God.

So there are two short prayers we might make at the beginning of every day:

“Grant, Lord, that all my thoughts, words, actions and responses may be directed solely to your love and service this day” and

“Help me, Lord, to seek, to find and to respond to you in every person and in every experience of this day.”

And, of course, these prayers can be repeated as a reminder during the day. At the end of the day it is a good custom to make a brief review of where we met Christ during the past day and how we responded to his presence. It will be a time for praise, repentance, discernment and thanksgiving.

GOSPEL (Luke 6:27-38)

For many people, even those who identify themselves as Christians, this may be one of the most difficult passages in the Gospel. It seems to express an idealism that is totally unrealistic and unattainable.

We live today in a world of great violence, of terrorism, of increasing litigation - suing and counter-suing, violence and murder, of vicious vendettas often stirred up in the tabloid press and other media, the horror of terrorist attacks on the innocent. Are these things not to be avenged?

Where do Jesus’ words fit in? It may be worth noting that the passage (in the original - not in today’s reading) begins: “I say this to you who are listening.” In order to understand what Jesus is really saying to us, we have to put aside our prejudices and assumptions and really listen to what he is saying. This passage, in particular, is one where we are likely to react emotionally.

“Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who treat you badly.” We may feel that to follow this teaching is to try something which is totally beyond our capacity, that it would require a tremendous amount of will-power and that it would only encourage those people to behave even worse. In the Old Testament hatred of evildoers is presumed to be the right attitude to have. But Jesus is extending love to the enemy and the persecutor.

This is the core of Jesus’ teaching, which he himself practised. The Golden Rule which is often expressed as “Do not do to others what you would not want them do to you” is expressed here in positive terms.

The first big hurdle is the word “love”. For us it is a very emotional word, implying both affection and intimacy. For us to “love” is often to “be in love with”, to “be attracted to”. But Jesus is not telling us to be in love with our enemies. He is not even telling us to like them. The Greek verb which the gospel uses is agapao from which the noun agape comes. Agape [pronounced ‘ah-gah-pay’] is a special kind of love. It is not the physically-expressed love of lovers nor is it the love of close friends. It is rather an attitude of positive regard towards other people by which I wish for their well-being.

This, in fact, is the love that God has for us. It is a one-sided love in the sense that a return is not expected. God reaches out in infinite love to every single person without exception. God wishes every person to experience that love; God wishes the fullest well-being of every single person. That love of his is often not returned; it is often rejected or ignored.

But it continues unabated, like the father in the story of the prodigal son waiting for his boy to come back. The father continued to love his son even in his lowest moments of debauchery and degradation. It was the same with the people who were nailing Jesus to the cross. He prayed for them, for their being forgiven and that they might come to a realisation of just what they were doing.

In this sense, loving our enemies seems altogether reasonable. And not only not impossible but really the only thing to do.

Who are our “enemies”? First of all, they are not our enemies in the sense that we hate them or want to harm them. In that sense, Christians should have no enemies. Rather, they are people who are hostile to us. They want to harm us, take revenge on us, even destroy us, or whatever.

There are two ways we can deal with such people. We can set out to do more harm to them, to take revenge on them, or try to wipe them out completely. Or we can try and work to turn them round.

Our problem is that we tend to focus too much on ourselves and our own immediate needs and overlook the needs of others. To love as God loves is to focus more on others. We can only do this if we have a strong inner sense of security and self-acceptance. Then we are not too worried about what people say about us or do to us.

And then, too, we can turn our attention much more to the one who is hating or harming. We will begin to ask why do they have to act in this way. What is hurting inside them that drives them to such behaviour? Already we are just by thinking in this way beginning to care for our enemy and beginning to love him or her.

And is not this a much better solution to the problem? To bring peace back into that person’s life and initiate a healing process in them and between them and me.

Jesus is not at all asking us to do something “unnatural”. We do not naturally want to hate or be hated. We want to love and to be loved. We see many parts of the world where - for years - there has been a process of hatred and retaliation in a never-ending spiral of vengeance and loss of life.

The only way to break this cycle is to follow Jesus’ advice. It is not a lose-lose or lose-win situation; it is a win-win situation where everyone benefits.

Perhaps words of the late Mother Teresa are appropriate here:

“Love, to be true, has to hurt. I must be willing to give whatever it takes not to harm other people and, in fact, to do good to them. This requires that I be willing to give until it hurts. Otherwise, there is no love in me and I bring injustice, not peace, to those around me.”

To put Jesus’ teaching into effect is not a matter of strengthening our will to do something very difficult but to change our conventional thinking at the deepest level, to see things his way. Once we do that, it becomes much easier.

Jesus’ application of this teaching also has been the subject of much mockery.”To the man who slaps you on one cheek, present the other cheek too.” In a world where macho reigns, this is just too much. Only wimps would follow Jesus’ advice because they are afraid to do anything else. Schwarzenegger and Stallone know what to do in such cases: mow them down with an automatic machine gun.

Again, it is a question of seeing things from Jesus’, that is, God’s viewpoint. Turning the other cheek, as it is presented here, is not at all an act of weakness. It requires great courage and great inner strength and an awareness that the one who strikes is the one who is really weak. It is easy to lash out at another person by word or act. It is easy to hit back; it is almost an instinctive reaction but it is not the truly human response.

To hit back is to reduce oneself to the same level as one’s attacker and it solves nothing in the long run. Deliberately and calmly not to hit back is to refuse, in Eric Berne’s words, “to play the other person’s game”. It is to break the cycle and change the level of the playing field and move it to a higher level - the level of mutual respect and human dignity.

Jesus set the example when he was struck on the face during his trial. During the whole degradation of the Passion his dignity shines out in contrast to the pathetic posturings of his judges and tormentors. This was the spirit that guided Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King and which is behind all movements devoted to active non-violence.

Jesus sets the principle: “Treat others as you would like them to treat you.” You do not want to be hated or struck so you refuse, no matter what happens, to hate or strike another person.”If you love those who love you, what thanks can you expect?” No, we will not react simply in the way others deal with us.

As followers of Christ, we see things in a completely different way and we want to behave differently. We believe that not only do we personally benefit from following Jesus’ way but that others too will benefit and may even come to our point of view.

Finally, Jesus calls us to follow the model of God himself: “Be compassionate as your Father is compassionate.” In Matthew’s gospel it is, “Be perfect as. . .” The meaning is the same: our perfection consists in our empathetic reaching out in compassionate agape to every single person. And, through us, the compassion of God can then be experienced by people.

We are not to judge or condemn persons (although we may be asked and required to give an objective and discerned evaluation of a person’s behaviour or fitness for some task or position). And we are to forgive. Then we will not be condemned and will in turn receive forgiveness.

The emphasis is on reaching out to others rather than gathering for ourselves, being turned in on our little, insecure selves.”Give, and there will be gifts for you.” Jesus put this graphically when he told us to give not only our cloak to someone asking for it but our tunic as well. Given that the poor in those days only had two garments, that would leave the donor totally naked!

But that is the point: the one filled with the spirit of Christ has nothing to lose, nothing to be ashamed of. Life consists in what we are able to give and not what we can get.”The amount you measure out is the amount you will be given back.”

And that, above all, applies to agape. Everyone can give an endless supply of that.

Week 23 | Friday

1 Timothy 1:1-2,12-14; Luke 6:39-42

We begin reading today from the First Letter to Timothy. The two letters to Timothy and the letter to Titus are known as the Pastoral Letters because of their main subject matter.

A brief biography of Timothy:

Timothy was a native of Lystra (in modern Turkey). His father was Greek, while his mother was a Jewish Christian (Acts 16:1). From childhood he had been taught the Old Testament (2 Tit 1:5; 3:15). Paul called him “my true son in the faith” (1:2), perhaps having led him to Christ during his first visit to Lystra.

At the time of his second visit Paul invited Timothy to join him on his missionary travels, and circumcised him so that his Greek ancestry would not be a liability in working with the Jews (Acts 16:3) - a good example of Paul’s pastoral flexibility, considering how strongly he spoke against those who wanted to re-introduce circumcision into the Christian church or to force Gentile Christians to undergo it.

Timothy shared in the evangelisation of Macedonia and Achaia (Acts 17:14-15; 18:5) and was with Paul during much of his long preaching ministry at Ephesus (Acts 19:22). Thessalonika and Philippi, both recipients of Pauline letters were in Macedonia, while Corinth was in Achaia in southern Greece. He travelled with Paul from Ephesus to Macedonia, to Corinth, back to Macedonia, and to Asia Minor (Acts 20:1-6). He seems even to have accompanied Paul all the way to Jerusalem.

He was certainly with Paul during the apostle’s first imprisonment (Phil 1:1; Col 1:1; Philem 1).

Following Paul’s release (after Acts 28), Timothy again travelled with him but eventually stayed at Ephesus to deal with the problems there, while Paul went on to Macedonia.

Paul’s closeness to and admiration of Timothy are seen in Paul’s naming him as the co-sender of his letters (2 Corinthians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians and Philemon) and in his speaking highly of him to the Philippians (Phil 2:19-22).

At the end of his life, Paul requested Timothy to join him at Rome (2 Tim 4:9,21). According to Heb 13:23, Timothy himself was imprisoned and subsequently released - whether at Rome or elsewhere, we do not know. Timothy was not an apostle, and he was probably not an ‘overseer’ (episkopos) since he was given instructions about overseers (3:1-7; 5:17-22). It may be best to regard him as an apostolic representative, delegated to carry out special work (see Tit 1:5). (NIV Study Bible)

“Paul, apostle of Christ Jesus, appointed by the command of God our Saviour and of Christ Jesus our hope.” The letter purports to come from Paul but there is discussion among scholars to what extent the Letter is Paul’s own writing, although it certainly reflects much of his thinking as we know it from his genuine letters.

He calls himself an ‘apostle’, seeing himself as being specially commissioned by “the command of God our Saviour”, a claim he makes more than once and a term which the Letter to the Hebrews applies to Jesus himself (Heb 3:1). In his other letters, Paul seldom uses the term ‘Saviour’ but in the Pastoral Letters he uses it when speaking both of the Father and of Christ. In speaking of Christ Jesus as “our hope” he is, as was mentioned elsewhere, speaking of an attitude of complete confidence in God’s promises yet to be fulfilled.

The Letter is addressed to Timothy, “true child of mine in the faith”. Timothy seems to have been found by Paul on a visit to Lystra (in present-day Turkey) during one of his missionary journeys and brought into the church by him. Paul, in other words, was his “God-father”. He also calls Timothy his son in the First Letter to the Corinthians (“my beloved and faithful son in the Lord”, 1 Cor 4:17) and in the Second Letter to Timothy (“Timothy, my child whom I love”, 2 Tim 1:2).

To Timothy Paul wishes “Grace, mercy and peace from God the Father and from Christ Jesus our Lord.” Compared to other letters, it is a rather brief salutation. Yet we could hardly ask anything more precious from God our Father and the Lord Jesus than “grace”, the tangible experience of God’s love in our life; “mercy”; the compassion of God ready to forgive us at all times; and “peace”, the inner peace that only God can give and which no one can take from us.

Paul then gives a personal testimony of God’s love in his life. He expresses his deep gratitude to God “who has given me strength”. The strength to break away from his old rigid religious beliefs which were a source of such hatred and violence. By calling Paul into his service, Christ his Lord has made a vote of confidence in his trustworthiness.

God had good reason to have doubts given the fact that Paul had been a “blasphemer and a persecutor and contemptuous”. By going all out to destroy the Christian communities, he was a blasphemer because he was, in fact, attacking Christ himself. On the road to Damascus, he had been knocked to the ground and had heard a voice say: “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?” “Who are you, sir?” Paul asked in reply. The answer came: “I am Jesus, the one you are persecuting.” (Acts 9:4-5). In attacking the Christians, he was attacking Jesus himself.”As often as you do it to the least of these my brothers and sisters, you do it to Me” (Matt 25:40). It is another affirmation of the real presence of Christ in his Body, the Christian community.

His blaspheming, of course, arose out of his persecuting activities and his Pharisaical arrogance in wanting to rid the world of what he regarded as renegade and heretical Jews.

However, the Lord showed compassion on him because, due to his lack of faith in Christ at the time, he basically was acting in ignorance. Most prejudice against other people arises from ignorance and hence is not seen by the prejudiced person as prejudice but a conviction about the ‘truth’, a ‘truth’ which, in fact, is very incomplete and often completely false.

Since then, “the grace of our Lord has been granted me in overflowing measure, along with the faith and love which are in Christ Jesus”.

It is never too late to be converted and change one’s ways. No matter what we may have done, God is ready to receive us back. We, however, have a very strong tendency to continue condemning people for their past or for their perceived background. We tend so easily to stereotype and scapegoat people.

But people can change, can change radically and they should be judged and evaluated on how they are now and not on how they were at a former time. Paul is a good example of this.

We need to remember that God always accepts us as we are here and now. One sincere act of love on our part wipes out everything. It is important that we try to act towards others in the same way.

GOSPEL (Luke 6:39-42)

In Matthew the parallel passage today is addressed to the Pharisees but in Luke it is addressed to the disciples.

Jesus makes two points:

a. The blind cannot lead the blind. The disciple, left to himself, does not know very much and depends on his teacher. But, once he is fully trained and has learnt everything he can from his teacher, then he becomes an extension of his teacher. He shares the knowledge and wisdom of his teacher and can, in turn, be a guide to others.

This is something we all have to do: to listen carefully to what Jesus tells us and make it part of our own lives. Only then can we effectively lead others to him.

b. We have to be very careful about sitting in judgement on others. Jesus uses a graphic image of someone trying to remove a speck of dust from another person’s eye while there is a large splinter of wood in their own. How can we see properly to correct the vision of our brother when our own vision is so distorted?

The faults we so easily see in others are often trivial in comparison with our own shortcomings. Of course, much of the energy we exert in putting down others (the main staple of our gossiping sessions!) is sub-consciously to compensate for the shortcomings we are all too aware of in ourselves. Instead of lifting ourselves up by changing our ways, we try to drag others down.

And, so often our judgements are based purely on external behaviour. We usually have no idea of the inner motives or intentions of other people or an awareness of their inability to behave otherwise than they do.

And, while we can be very ready with criticism behind people’s backs, we do not dare to say these things to their face. Yet, there may be times when we will be asked to give - as far as is possible - an objective evaluation of a person’s behaviour or their fitness for some responsibility. And, not infrequently, we will shy away from this responsibility.

Week 23 | Saturday

FIRST READING (1 Timothy 1:15-17)

In today’s short reading we pick up immediately where we left off yesterday and we are on the same theme: God’s mercy to the sinner and Paul as a striking example of it.

“Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners.” This, Paul tells Timothy, is a saying he can rely on and that no one should doubt. There is no such saying found anywhere else in the New Testament and it may simply be a creation of Paul himself and an expression of his firm belief.

For him, the truth of the statement is perfectly clear because Paul says that he himself is one of the greatest of sinners. This was because of his record in persecuting innocent Christians and throwing many of them into jail. It looks also as if he was an accomplice in the stoning of Stephen, if not the chief instigator. That must have been very much on his conscience. So, if he has received mercy and forgiveness for his past - as is indicated by his being chosen personally by Christ as apostle - it is because Jesus Christ meant to make him a striking example of his inexhaustible patience with sinners everywhere, who threw themselves at God’s mercy.

And he concludes by offering honour and glory to the “eternal King, the incorruptible and imperishable, the invisible and only God”.

Reflecting on these words, we can, first of all, recall how we ourselves have experienced the mercy and “inexhaustible patience” of Christ our Lord, considering how many times we have failed in our service of him and in loving those around us.

Secondly, we need to have some of that same compassion and patience in our own dealings with those whose behaviour we feel falls short of Christian and human values.

We live in a very judgmental world but we need to remember the warning that Jesus gave us in yesterday’s Gospel reading: “Why look at the speck in your brother’s eye, when you fail to see the plank in your own?” (Luke 6:41).

GOSPEL (Luke 6:43-49)

In our final reading from Luke’s version of the Sermon on the Plain, Jesus speaks of the qualities of a genuine disciple. The goodness of every disciple comes from within and is not to be measured merely by his external behaviour. A really healthy tree cannot produce bad fruit; nor can an unhealthy tree produce genuinely good fruit.

At the same time, consistently good behaviour is a sign of a healthy interior.”Every tree can be told by its own fruit” and “A man’s words flow out of what fills his heart”. We need to focus our energies on our interior spirit. If that is good, the rest will take care of itself.

Another measure of the good disciple is how he listens and acts on the words of his Master. To “listen” includes hearing, understanding, accepting, and assimilating into one’s self the Master’s teaching and vision. The behaviour then follows naturally, spontaneously and, to a large extent, effortlessly.

Such a person is compared to a man who has built his house on a strong foundation. When floods came, the house stood firm. On the other hand, the one who listens but does not take in and so does not act on what he has heard is like a man who built his house on a poor foundation. When the floods came, it collapsed.

This parable needs to be read in the context of the early Church where, in time of persecution, some stood firm because their faith was deeply rooted, while others fell away at the first sign of pressure.

Even if there is no overt persecution of the Christian faith where we live, we live in times which are very threatening to a genuine Christ-centred life. Without a sure foundation, it is very easy to be enticed away to a life of materialism, consumerism, hedonism, and individualism. Because of their superficial attractiveness and their being indulged in by so many around us, these things are often far more insidious than outright attacks on our faith.

In fact, experience shows again and again that nothing strengthens people’s faith more than open persecution. Most of us live in a much more dangerous environment, an environment not of torture and imprisonment but of advertising and media hype promising untold happiness and pleasure, where the vision of the Gospel is ignored or seen as irrelevant. We need to have very sure foundations to live in such a world.

Week 24 | Monday

FIRST READING (1 Timothy 2:1-8)

Paul continues his advice to his young colleague and companion, Timothy. Today he urges that prayers of petition, intercession and thanksgiving be made for people everywhere but especially for those in authority and government.

This marked insistence that the liturgical prayer of the community concern itself with the needs of all, whether Christian or not, and especially of those in authority, may imply that a disposition existed at Ephesus to refuse prayer for pagans. In actuality, such prayer aids the community to achieve peaceful relationships with non-Christians (v. 2) and contributes to their salvation, since it derives its value from the presence within the community of Christ who is the one and only Saviour of all (3-6). The vital apostolic mission to the Gentiles concerning Christ’s purpose of the universal salvation should be reflected in the prayer of the community (v. 7) which should be unmarred by internal dissension (v. 8; cf. Matt 5:23ff). (New American Bible)

Paul tells Timothy that petitions, prayers, intercessions and thanksgiving should be offered for every person. He includes kings and others in authority, so that the Christians may be able to live peaceful and quiet lives “with all devotion [godliness] and propriety”. Although it looks like a very ordinary prayer, the end may reflect some apprehensions about future developments.

Anyone who reads the Acts of the Apostles knows just how much trouble the Christians experienced at the hands of civil and religious authorities. But it is possible that the words were written when the madman Nero was emperor. He would unleash a ferocious attack on the Christians. And both Peter and Paul were to lose their lives as martyrs under this crazed ruler.

But rather than subject rulers to abuse or retaliatory action, Paul urges that prayers be said for them. Paul’s teaching is also in line with the advice that we saw from Jesus in a recent Gospel reading about loving those who hate and persecute us and to pray for them.

At the same time, Paul believed that generally legal authorities should be obeyed and respected. He told the Romans: “Let everyone obey the authorities that are over them, for there is no authority except from God, and all authority that exists is established by God. In consequence, the one who opposes authority rebels against the ordinances of God. . . Do you wish to be free from fear of authority? Do what is right and you will gain its approval for the ruler is God’s servant to work for your good” (Rom 13:1-4). Sometimes, of course, doing “what is right” may mean not obeying an authority and call for civil disobedience.

Paul tells Timothy to pray with all ‘godliness’. ‘Godliness’, together with ‘godly’, is a key word in the Pastoral Letters and occurs eight times in this Letter, once in 2 Timothy and once in Titus but nowhere else in the writings of Paul. It implies a good and holy life, with special emphasis on its Source, a deep reverence for God.

To pray in this way is right and acceptable to God our Saviour, who wants every person to be saved and reach the full knowledge of truth. The two elements here are really complementary, two sides of the same coin. To be ‘saved’ is to become the whole person that God wants one to be and central to that wholeness is the grasp and acceptance of what is fully true. The Way of Jesus is a way to wholeness and the Way of Jesus is Truth and Life. But wholeness and truth are never fully in our grasp. To get there is the goal of our whole lifespan.

That God wants all to experience this wholeness, sometimes referred to as ‘salvation’ or ‘redemption’ is surely the only satisfactory meaning that can be given to the death of Jesus, who died for every single person. It helps to counteract the ‘selective salvation’ of some who claim that God has decided whom he will save and who will be rejected. These people appeal to words of Paul in the Letter to the Romans: “God has mercy on whom he wishes, and whom he wishes he makes obdurate. . . Does not a potter have the right to make from the same lump of clay one vessel for a lofty purpose and another for a humble one?” (Rom 9:18, 21) This is not at all to say that God predestines us to salvation or damnation but only that some by their behaviour call out the mercy of God and others bring about their rejection by their behaviour. God wants all to be saved but no one is forced to accept salvation. It is a gift and a grace offered to all but not necessarily accepted by all.

Because, as Paul continues, “there is only one God, and there is only one mediator between God and humanity, himself a human being, Christ Jesus, who offered himself as a ransom for all.” There is only one God is the basic belief of Judaism, confessed every day by devout Jews in the Shema prayer (Deut 6:4). The Greek word ‘ransom’ was used most commonly for the price paid to redeem a slave. Similarly, Christ paid the ransom price of his own life to free us from the slavery of sin. This was the greatest love that a person can show.

“This was the witness given at the appointed time.” By his willingness to die for the whole human race Christ showed the human race that God wanted everybody to be saved. He was the Father’s ‘witness’ all through his life to the love of God for all of us, but never so supremely as at the moment of his dying on the cross. The Greek word for ‘witness’ is the same as for ‘martyr’. Jesus is the Supreme Witness, the Supreme Martyr.

Now Paul has been appointed “herald and apostle” of this great message from God made in and through Jesus and has become a teacher to the Gentiles “in faith and in truth”. A herald is one given the authority to make an important public proclamation. In his book Models of the Church, Fr (now Cardinal) Avery Dulles SJ lists one of the models as “Church as Herald”. The mission of Paul has been passed on to all of us baptised. It is something we have to do both collectively and individually. And what Paul has been called on to testify is that, through his death, Christ has bridged the gap between God and humanity and made salvation available to every person.

Finally, he calls on the men in the community to lift their hands up reverently in prayer, with no anger or argument. A feuding community does not provide a conducive environment for prayer.

The following paragraph in the letter will not be read in our liturgy. It deals with the very submissive role that Paul says women are supposed to accept in the prayer assembly. We have made some progress in this area but we are not the whole way there yet for full integration.

The reading then is telling us that the true Christian spirit is not to rid the world of those who are the enemies of Christianity. When we pray, it is not to ask God to punish or destroy our enemies (as was sometimes done in the Old Testament) but rather to pray that they may change and see things differently, see things in God’s way and become faithful to truth, love and justice.

We, as Christians are bold enough to think that in the message of Jesus we are on the path of truth and the lived experience of the Christian life, especially in the saints, bears it out. This was what motivated Paul to be the herald and apostle of the Gospel; we, too, are called to the same task.

Let us remember, too, not just during Mass but very regularly to pray for others, especially those whom we see as a source of trouble in our lives, people we do not like and who do not like us, people who seem to “have it in for us”, difficult superiors or relatives or work colleagues.

Praying in all sincerity that God will shower them with his love, his grace and blessings can really bring about a change in them. This has been attested to again and again. Even more importantly, it changes us. It is difficult to hate a person you are continually praying for. It helps to dissipate anger and brings a special kind of peace. It changes the way we relate to them.

And it is a relatively easy thing to do. Try it.

GOSPEL (Luke 7:1-10)

After he had finished the Sermon on the Plain (although we do not necessarily have to think its represents teachings all given at one time) Jesus went into Capernaum, the base from which he operated when in Galilee. Almost immediately he is met with a request for healing but this one is somewhat different. It will set the stage for developments which will take place and be described later in the Acts of the Apostles (also by Luke).

The story concerns the slave of a centurion. A centurion was an army officer with - as his rank indicates - one hundred men under him. He was presumably attached to the Roman garrison in the town or one of Herod Antipas’ forces. The Roman military in general did not have a good reputation and Mel Gibson’s film ‘The Passion of the Christ’ does not altogether do them an injustice in portraying their cruelty and brutality. However, those in the Gospel do not appear in a bad light. This is a good example of the danger of stereotyping any group of people - something we are all very easily prone to do.

He was not necessarily a Roman but he was certainly not a Jew. He was a Gentile outsider. His slave, who was very dear to him, had fallen seriously ill. This, in turn, implies he treated his slave well. Undoubtedly, he had heard the stories of what Jesus had done by way of healing and wondered if his slave could also be helped.

However, as an outsider he did not dare to approach Jesus personally. He sent a delegation consisting of Jewish town elders. These are not the ‘elders’ mentioned during Jesus’ passion but simply respected members of the local Jewish community. In Matthew’s account, the centurion approaches Jesus himself. Luke having him go through influential Jewish friends sounds more plausible.

They apparently were only too willing to help because they said he was very friendly to the Jews and had even built a synagogue for them. The stage is being set for the story of Cornelius, also a soldier and the first Gentile Christian, in the Acts of the Apostles (cf. Acts 10:1ff.).

While Jesus was on his way to the house, the centurion immediately sent word that it was not necessary for Jesus to come personally. As a friend of Jews, he knew that a devout Jew, and especially a rabbi, could not enter the house of a Gentile. He did not want to be a source of embarrassment for Jesus.

“I am not worthy that you should come under my roof,” he said - words which we now use every time we prepare to approach the table of the Eucharist. Just as he himself felt unworthy to be approached by Jesus. He knew that Jesus had only to say a word and his slave would be made whole again.

He recognised the very special authority that Jesus had, an authority, in some respects, not unlike his own as an army officer. He had only to say “Go” to a soldier and he went; he only had to say “Do this” and it was done. Jesus could do the same.

Jesus is amazed at the man’s faith.”I have never found such faith, even in Israel.” Only twice in the Gospel is Jesus described as being amazed. This is caused by the faith of a Gentile; the other was caused by the unbelief of his townspeople in Nazareth (Mark 6:6).

When the delegation returned to the centurion’s house, they found that the slave was totally well again.

What strikes one so strongly in this story is the character of the centurion who contradicted every stereotype of the Roman soldier which the average person in Palestine would have had. He is kind and caring of his slave. He has contributed to the building of the local synagogue. He is extremely sensitive to Jewish customs and does not embarrass Jesus by approaching him directly. And, when Jesus offers to go to his house, he says that it is not necessary. He knows that Jesus, as a Jew, would become unclean by entering a Gentile house. He is a good example how wrong we can be in generalising about certain kinds or classes of people. He also clearly illustrates how a Gentile could be, as the early Church only gradually discovered, a worthy person to belong to the Christian community. In fact, this story prepares the way for Luke’s account later in the Acts of a centurion, Cornelius, being received as the first Gentile member of the Christian community (Acts chap. 10).

The key factor, of course, in this healing story is the faith of the Gentile, a faith which Jesus said he had never encountered even among many of his own people. Beginning with Cornelius, this experience will be repeated in the early Church as the first Christians, all Jews, begin to realise that the Gentiles too are being called to follow Christ and that their Spirit-filled faith can be as strong as that of any of them.

For us today it is a reminder that Jesus can reveal himself to the most unlikely persons and that we must never presume that a person is unfitted for the Christian life based on past behaviour or any other characteristics. God can call anyone and he does.

Let us, too, follow the example of the centurion in our confidence in God’s healing power in our lives.

Week 24 | Tuesday

FIRST READING (1 Tim 3:1-13)

When this Letter was written the early Church was still developing the leadership and pastoral structures with which we are now familiar.

Paul today has advice for “bishops” (called “presiding elders” by the New Jerusalem Bible) and “deacons” and lays down the criteria on which they are to be chosen.

The structure of ‘bishop’, ‘priest’ and ‘deacon’ as we know it now has not yet taken form.

The Jerusalem Bible has a useful overview of the situation:

The word episkopos (‘overseer’, ‘supervisor’ or ‘president’) had not yet acquired the same meaning as ‘bishop’ and seems sometimes to overlap with the presbyteros (‘elder’). In the earliest days each Christian community was governed by a body of elders (‘presbyters’, from which comes the English word ‘priests’), who were prominent and respected people in the community. This was the case both in Jerusalem and in the Diaspora (the communities scattered through East Asia and to the west) and it merely continued both the ancient practice of the Old Testament and the more recent practice of the Jews.

These episkopoi who are not yet ‘bishops’ in our sense and who are mentioned in connection with the diakonoi (servants, attendants, assistants, deputies, ministers, ‘deacons’) seem in some passages to be identical with the elders. The Greek word episkopos, taken over from the pagan world probably as an equivalent for a semitic title, indicated the duty of an administrative officer, while presbuteros indicated the status or dignity of the same officer. The episkopoi in the college of presbyters may have taken turns to carry out their official duties of administration and leadership.

It is quite certain that Christian presbuteroi or episkopoi were not merely concerned with the practical side of organising things: they had both to teach and govern. They were appointed by the apostles or their representatives by the imposition of hands; their powers derived from God and were charismatic. The word episkopos eventually replaced analogous titles like proistamenos (official), poimen (pastor, shepherd), hegoumenos (guide, leader).

These heads of the local community who developed into our priests (presbuteroi) and bishops (episkopoi) were helped by diakonoi (deacons). The transformation of a local assembly ruled by a body of bishops or presbyters, into an assembly ruled by a single bishop set over a number of priests (a stage reached by the time of Ignatius of Antioch, died c. 107 AD) must have involved the intermediate stage when a single episkopos in each community was given the same powers over that local community which had previously been exercised over several communities by the apostles or their representatives like Timothy or Titus.

The overseers/elders were carefully chosen by the communities and hands were laid on them to indicate their appointments were blessed by the Holy Spirit. This is the beginning of the sacrament of Holy Orders.

Paul himself was not a bishop; he was an apostle and evangeliser. And it is not certain that Timothy was a bishop; his work seems to have been more similar to that of Paul, an animator and visitor of communities scattered over the whole of the eastern Mediterranean.

In this Letter and in the whole New Testament there is as yet no mention of ‘priests’ as we know them now. As we saw, the word ‘priest’ is a corruption of the Greek word presbyteros or ‘elder’. We see these elders mentioned as leaders of their communities and even presiding at the celebration of the Eucharist. It would not be quite accurate to call them ‘laymen’ as distinct from ‘clergy’, because in the Church at this time neither term would have been used. The distinction between ‘clergy’ and ‘laity’ simply did not exist.

However, there was another type of priest represented by the Greek word hiereus, from which comes our word ‘hier-archy’ (= rule by priests). This was a word applied to temple priests, whether of the Jewish temple in Jerusalem or the many thousands of temples scattered throughout the Greek and Roman world. In the beginning, the Church did not have this type of priest nor did it want to. The reason was clear.

For the early Christians, there was only one Priest in this sense and that was Jesus Christ himself. He was both the Priest (hiereus and not presbuteros) and the Victim of the sacrifice made on the cross, a sacrifice which in its infinite value replaced all other sacrifices before and after, a sacrifice that need never again be repeated. This is all beautifully laid out in the Letter to the Hebrews (e. g. Heb 5:1-10).

Our Eucharistic celebration is a re-presentation of that unique sacrifice on the cross, which was sacramentally anticipated at the Last Supper. The one who presides is now called a ‘priest’, of which the Latin translation is sacerdos, the equivalent of hiereus. But it is the bishop who is now regarded as having the fullness of priest-hood. These developments took place in the Church over the course of the centuries.

In today’s reading, Paul gives Timothy a detailed character-sketch of what the presiding elder and the deacon should be. Many, but not all, of the requirements are just as valid today.

Regarding the ‘bishop’ or presiding elder, Paul says that to desire to fill this role is a noble thing and that is why he (it was always a man) had to be of impeccable character. He lists the desired qualifications as follows:

- He was to be the husband of one wife.

This was to preclude any violation of God’s marriage law, whether through polygamy or marital unfaithfulness. As the elders were, by definition, chosen from the older men of the community, Paul assumed they already would be married and have children. An otherwise qualified unmarried man was not necessarily barred. It is also improbable that the standard forbade an elder to remarry if his wife died. The most likely meaning is simply that a faithful monogamous married life must be maintained.

- Temperate, discreet and courteous

- Hospitable

- A good teacher

- Not a heavy drinker

- Not hot-tempered

- Gentle and peaceable

- Not avaricious

- Someone who manages his own household well

- Brings up his children to obey him and be well-behaved

How can someone who can’t manage his own family expect to be able to take care of the church community? [An argument for married bishops and priests today?!]

- Not a new convert

In case such early promotion go to his head and “he incur the same condemnation as the devil”.

- Held in good repute by outsiders (non-Christians) so that he never earns a bad reputation among them.

It is, even by today’s standards, quite a demanding list of qualities and one that many bishops and priests might find it hard to meet.

Next comes the ‘deacon’ (diakonos). The word ‘deacon’ refers to someone who serves the community and in general is seen on a lower level than the elder. Authority and ministry in the community is always seen in terms of service rather than control. Jesus himself had said he came to serve and not to be served (Mark 10:45). ‘Minister/ministry’, from the Latin minister/ministerium means one who serves and is the equivalent of the Greek diakonos/diakonia.

The men chosen in Acts 6:1-6 were probably not only the first deacons mentioned in the New Testament but also the first to be appointed in the church. Generally, their service was meant to free the leaders to give full attention to prayer and the ministry of the word (Acts 6:2,4).

As a person with responsibility in the community, the deacon (diakonos), too, has to meet certain standards. Paul lists them as follows:

- Respectable

- Not double-tongued, straightforward

- Moderate in his drinking habits

- No squalid greed for money

- Holds fast to the divinely revealed faith

- Is to be subjected to a period of probation and only admitted as deacon, if there is nothing against him.

Women are mentioned at this point but it is not clear whether Paul is referring to women deacons, as some would hold, or only speaking about the deacon’s wife. Paul in his Letter to the Romans writes: “I commend to you our sister Phoebe, who is a deaconess of the church of Cenchreae” (Rom 16:1). However, it is disputed also what exactly her status was.

In any case, these women, deaconesses or deacons’ wives, are to be

- Respectable

- Not slanderous gossips

- Sober and entirely dependable

Returning to the deacon, he is to be, like the ‘bishop’

- A husband of one wife

- Able to manage his children and household well.

Finally, says Paul, those who carry out their role as deacons well will earn a high standing in the community and be an authoritative voice in matters concerning faith in Christ Jesus.

In more recent times, and especially since the Second Vatican Council, the concept of ministry has been broadened in our Church. It had become largely confined to the bishop and the priest. Now the order of deacon has been enhanced and now also includes married deacons. And there does not seem to be any intrinsic objection why women could not also be deacons but some might see it as the thin end of the wedge leading to women priests.

In addition, other ministries have been introduced on a non-clerical level, such as Scripture readers and ministers of the Eucharist. Paul speaks of a wide range of ministries by which people could actively contribute to the life and work of the community and this vision is being restored.

It is for every Christian and every parishioner to ask themselves how they can actively and constructively contribute to the service of their community or parish. This is what gives life to a parish and draws people into it.

And we need to pray and work for enlightened and practical solutions to the critical shortage of pastoral leadership in so many parts of the Church today.

*cf. NIV Study Bible for chart listing different qualifications for elders/overseers and deacons.

GOSPEL (Luke 7:11-17)

This story is only found in Luke. It is one of only three stories in the Gospel where Jesus is described as bringing a dead person to life. The most dramatic is the story of Lazarus told in John’s gospel. There is the also the story of the synagogue leader’s daughter although it is not categorically certain that she had actually died. She might have been in a coma or catatonic state.

In the thinking of the time, the scene is particularly sad. A woman, who has already lost her husband, has now lost her only son and the only means of her support. She is on the way to bury him.

The lot of the widow, in those days often a relatively young woman, was particularly difficult in a society where the married woman was no longer the responsibility of her own family and who, after the death of husband and children, was no longer the responsibility of her husband’s family either. She was largely left to her own devices in a society where social welfare of any kind was unknown.

Jesus himself is deeply moved at her plight. At this point, for the first time, Luke refers to Jesus as “Lord”, a title reserved for God himself. He approaches the litter (not a coffin as we know it) carrying the dead man, tells the bearers to stop and then orders the young man to rise up. As in other similar stories, the word “rise up” is the same as that used to describe the resurrection of Jesus.”I have come that they may have life.”

The reaction of the people around is one of awe and admiration.”A great prophet has risen among us and God has visited his people.” They had no doubts about the origin of what they had seen taking place; it was the work of God. Not surprisingly, the story spread like wildfire all through Judea and beyond. The episode prepares the way for Jesus’ response to the disciples of John the Baptist a little later (but which is not included in our Mass readings at this time).

This story should help us to look at our own situation and see, first of all, how alive we really are.

Let us look around and see how many people need to be lifted up and helped to find new life. Maybe we can do something for them.

Week 24 | Wednesday

Readings - 1 Timothy 3:14-16; Luke 7:31-35

FIRST READING (1 Timothy 3:14-16)

The first part of today’s reading is an immediate follow-up on yesterday’s about the qualities required of “bishops” (episkopoi) and “deacons” (diakonoi).

Paul is writing to Timothy from Rome in the hope of being able to pay him a personal visit in the near future. But, in case his visit is “delayed” (because he may actually be in prison), he is sending the present letter in order to instruct him on his responsibility of setting high standards of conduct in the church of Ephesus and its nearby towns.”I want you to know how people ought to behave in God’s household - that is, in the church of the living God, pillar and support of the truth.”

The care he must exercise over this community is required by the profound nature of Christianity, “the mystery of our religion is very deep indeed”. A full understanding of our Christian faith and of the church requires a great deal of prayer and reflection. And, unless there is a deep understanding of what it is about, one cannot expect Christians to behave in a desirable manner.

Then, using what seems to be part of a liturgical hymn from the Ephesian church, Paul expresses that “mystery” at the heart of Christian belief. It consists of six brief statements grouped in pairs:

He was made visible in the flesh,
justified in the Spirit,
seen by angels,
proclaimed to the Gentiles,
believed in throughout the world,
taken up in glory.

“He”, that is, Christ or it may be “It” referring to the “mystery” just mentioned. In either case, it centres on Christ, pre-existent (from all eternity the Word was with God) but, through the Incarnation, appearing in human flesh.

He was justified in the Spirit, which came down on him during his baptism in the Jordan.”This is my Beloved Son, in him I am well pleased.” Thus the mission of Jesus is fully endorsed, as will happen again at the Transfiguration.

The holiness and divinity of Christ were also proved by his rising in glory. The Holy Spirit enables Jesus to drive out demons (see Matt 12:28) and perform wonderful signs. Most importantly, the Spirit raised Jesus from the dead and thereby vindicated him, proving that he was indeed the Son of God.

The mystery of his Person was revealed to the angels (at his resurrection and ascension), and proclaimed to the Gentiles (by people like the apostles and Paul and Timothy),

The response of the Gentiles results in Jesus being believed in throughout the world. As Paul wrote, ‘world’ refers to the Mediterranean region, the world in which he lived but, of course, it has since become a reality far beyond his wildest imagining.

Finally, through his resurrection-ascension Christ has been taken up in glory, sitting at the right hand of the Father.

It is important for us to realise how deep is the mystery of our Christian faith centred on the Trinity and the Incarnation. It is inevitable that people, including bishops and priests, have different understandings of that faith, even after much study. Such differences should lead to a readiness to listen to others rather than lock ourselves into our own understanding. And let us remember what Jesus said was the only true sign of our belonging to him: “By this will all know that you are my followers, that you love one another.” Because, wherever there is love, God is also there. That, of course, does not excuse us - depending on our abilities - from trying to have the best understanding possible of the meaning of our faith.

GOSPEL (Luke 7:31-35)

Today’s passage follows immediately after the scene (not in our Mass readings) where Jesus answers the query from John the Baptist languishing in prison about whether Jesus is truly the Messiah. Jesus uses the occasion to speak words of high praise for John, “Of all the children born of women, there is no one greater than John”.

Jesus now criticises the cynicism and self-contradictory attitudes of those who reject both him and John. They have simply closed their ears and want to hear nothing and learn nothing. He compares them to children in a city square calling to their playmates.” When we played lively music for you, you would not dance; when we played funereal music, you would not mourn.”

This comparison Jesus applies to John the Baptist and himself. John led an austere life in the desert eating, as we are told elsewhere, only locusts and wild honey. They said he was mad and rejected him. Jesus came leading a highly convivial life, mixing with all kinds of people. They called him a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and other sinful people. He even invited a tax collector to be one of his twelve Apostles!

It was a no-win situation. When people are like that there is really nothing that can be done. Jesus concludes with the enigmatic statement, “Wisdom has been proved right by all her children.” Both John and Jesus could both be described as children of Wisdom, whose origin is God himself. Those who can see the hand of God in the lives of John and Jesus are also children of Wisdom. Those who adamantly refuse to see God are not.

It is important for us not to fall into such a trap. God speaks to us in so many ways and through so many people and situations. It is very easy to find ourselves excluding a priori the people or situations by which God is trying to reach us.

We cannot expect God to speak to us in ways which we find congenial. He may speak to us through a saint or a sinner. Through a conservative or a liberal. Through a man or a woman - or a young child. Through an old person or a young person. Through an educated or an illiterate person. . . Through a local person or a foreigner. Through a straight or gay person. . . Through a saint or a sinner. We have at all times to be ready to listen with an unprejudiced mind and heart.

Week 24 | Thursday

Readings - 1 Timothy 4:12-16; Luke 7:36-50

FIRST READING (1 Timothy 4:12-16)

Having given Timothy instructions on the qualities needed for “bishops” and “deacons”, Paul goes on with some advice for Timothy himself.

First, Paul tells him not to allow anyone to look down on him or ignore him because of his relative youth. It is believed that Timothy was in his mid-30s or even younger. Perhaps, for this reason, his leadership was called in question by older, or even younger, members of the community. In those days, positions of community leadership would normally not be held by someone so young. We have seen that, in general, the leaders of the churches were called ‘elders’, because they were ‘senior citizens’. It was believed that wisdom and experience went with age. But there could be exceptions. One outstanding example was the Macedonian Alexander, who, even as a very young man, had a mesmeric influence on his troops.

Timothy is to counter this possible disadvantage not by exerting his authority or throwing his weight about but by the way he speaks and behaves. He will have the greatest influence by his display of love for all, the evident depth of his Christian faith and his “purity” which includes not only sexual propriety but integrity in general. He is to be a totally transparent person. It is a recipe for any Christian leader today.

While he waits for Paul’s arrival he is to devote himself to reading to the people, presumably from the Old Testament and from the Christian tradition that had been gathered by that time. Depending on the date when the Letter was actually written, the gospels may not yet have been put together. If a later date is accepted, then Matthew, Mark and Luke could have been in circulation.

Paul also reminds Timothy that he has been given by the community a solemn mandate and a charism to carry out his mission of church leadership.”Do not neglect the gift you received when, as a result of prophecy, the presbyters laid their hands on you.”

The ‘laying on of hands’ could be the rite for transmitting a grace or charism. It could be the gesture used when blessing, or healing, or imparting the Holy Spirit to the newly baptised. It could also be the rite for consecrating a person for a particular ministry, as in this passage and later in the same letter (5:22). With this laying of hands, Timothy is endowed with a special grace and authority to carry out his special ministry. (Notice he was given his ministry by the [lay] elders of his community who laid hands on him. Ultimate authority is in the community.)

The gift is also given “as a result of prophecy”. The ‘prophet’ was a person highly esteemed in the Christian communities of Paul’s time. In Paul’s list of charisms in the First Letter to the Corinthians, ‘prophets’ are listed immediately behind ‘apostles’ in importance, ahead of teachers, healers and administrators (1 Cor 12:28). The prophet did not just foretell the future. He or she was one who could communicate a special message of encouragement or warning from God to the community. It is likely that Timothy’s being chosen for his special ministry was the result of such a prophetic utterance. Since the day on which he received the imposition of hands, Timothy has had a permanent charism (‘grace-gift’) that consecrates him to his ministry.

If Timothy conscientiously follows the instructions of Paul, then everyone will see how well he does. And he will bring about the salvation both of those who listen to him and his own. Salvation is both an event and an ongoing process. We are saved at the time we say ‘Yes’ to Christ’s call but are still being saved in the sense of continually being made more conformed to Christ’s image (1 Cor 1:18). In Baptism we become incorporated into the Body of Christ and experience his redeeming love but it is at the same time only the beginning of a long journey of an ever-deepening experiencing and living out of that love. As they say, not to go forward is to go back.

The advice Paul gives to Timothy can be applied in large measure to all of us. We should not judge others or allow ourselves to be judged merely on the matter of age, whether we are young or old, or on any other prejudicial stereotype for that matter - being a woman, handicapped, member of a religious or ethnic minority, sexual orientation or whatever.

Secondly, the quality of our Christianity is ultimately judged by the way we externally live our Christian calling not just by what we say or the authority labels we attach to ourselves. As Jesus said about the Pharisees: “Do as they say but don’t do as they do.” What people can see should also clearly reflect what is inside. We cannot, in any case, live a false life for very long. As the Gospel reminds us, a rotten tree cannot bear good fruit.

Thirdly, we too need to recognise and reflect on the unique gifts we have been given by which we are called to serve the community.

Lastly, the quality of our external Christian witness depends a great deal on an interior life enriched by reading, reflection and especially regular prayer. We cannot enrich others with something we do not have. That, in a nutshell, is Paul’s advice to Timothy. And to each one of us.

GOSPEL (Luke 7:36-50)

Today’s passage is one of the most striking scenes in the whole of the Gospel. It is a story only found in Luke and, in a way it is strange that it is not otherwise recorded. It is not the same as the anointing of Jesus at Bethany, described by Matthew (26:6-13). Perhaps to some, especially Jewish readers, it was a little too daring and close to the edge. Because it is a highly sexual story in which Jesus is deeply involved.

We are told that a Pharisee - his name is Simon - was keen to have Jesus eat at his house. The word ‘Pharisee’ means ‘separated one’ and they numbered about 6,000 throughout Palestine. They taught in synagogues and, as their name implies, they saw themselves on a higher level of religious observance. They believed that interpretations and rules handed down by tradition had virtually the same authority as Scripture (cf. Mark 7:8-13). As a result, they were constantly bothered by Jesus’ behaviour.

Jesus accepted the invitation and he joined Simon and others at the table. We should notice that Jesus accepted invitations from both Pharisees and tax collectors. Both were equally deserving of his love and service. The diners would be reclining on couches, rather than sitting, as was the fashion of the day. This helps to explain what is going to happen.

It is not clear whether what happened next was totally spontaneous or whether it was part of a conspiracy to put Jesus in a compromising position where he could be denounced (not unlike his being presented with an adulterous woman - John 8:1ff). In one sense it was strange that a woman such as this could burst into a Pharisee’s house unchallenged (there must have been servants); on the other hand, houses were not bolted and barred as they are in our more civilised(?) times.

What is clear is that the woman’s own intentions were sincere. We are told she was a sinner.”Sinner” here can only refer to some public immorality and very likely she was a “woman of the street”, a prostitute or at least a woman known for her promiscuous behaviour.

She was eager to meet with Jesus and heard that he was dining at Simon’s house. So she burst in, bringing an alabaster box of ointment (probably quite expensive - the gift of an appreciative client?) and came up to Jesus from behind. She immediately began crying and her abundant tears bathed Jesus’ feet. She then began to dry his feet with her long hair. The fact that she wore her hair down or let it down in public itself indicates that she was a “loose” woman. She kissed the feet of Jesus and poured the ointment over them.

Simon, whether he had planned the intrusion or not, was deeply shocked at the extraordinary scene that was playing out before his eyes and in his house. If Jesus was really a prophet, he thought to himself, he would know what kind of a woman this was who was touching him. She was a sinner and no good person, least of all a rabbi, should allow anything remotely like that to take place.

Jesus, fully aware of what was going on in Simon’s mind, tells him a story about two debtors. One owed a large amount and other a smaller amount. However, the creditor wrote off both debts. Which of the two, Jesus asked, would be more grateful and appreciative? Obviously the one who had been remitted the larger debt, said Simon.

“Well said,” replied Jesus and then went on to apply the parable to the present situation. In the process he indicates something that Simon had probably not thought of - that he, too, was a sinner, even though to a lesser degree. Because Simon had been guilty of not extending even the ordinary courtesies of hospitality to his guest.

Simon had not had Jesus’ feet washed when he came into the house but the woman had washed his feet with her tears and dried them with her hair. Simon had not given a kiss of greeting but the woman had not stopped kissing his feet since she came into the house. Simon had not put oil on his guest’s head but the woman had poured an expensive flask of ointment over his feet.

And therefore - now comes the point of the story: “Her many sins have been forgiven; hence she has shown great love.” The one who has less forgiven loves less. And, turning to the woman at his feet, Jesus says, “Your sins are forgiven.” And the guests at table begin to ask each other: “Who is this that he forgives sin?” Again Jesus says to the woman, “Your faith has made you whole again. Go in peace.”

This is a really extraordinary story. To appreciate this one has to enter into it visually and be really present with all one’s senses active. What comes across is the amazing composure and inner security and freedom of Jesus during the whole episode. He shows absolutely no signs of being uncomfortable or embarrassed. He does not pull away or tell the woman to stop what she is doing.

Here is this woman, known to be a public sinner, who comes in and weeps over him, wipes his feet with her hair and keeps kissing them passionately. The guests are highly disturbed, shocked and probably embarrassed but Jesus remains perfectly at ease. The reason is that he knows what the woman is doing and is not worried about what others might think she is doing.

Let us admire his ability to focus totally on the woman and not be self-conscious about the other people around. Can one imagine what a tabloid publication might have made of this scene?! What if something like that were to happen today with a bishop or a priest? Or some other prominent person? How would most clergy - or other public people react in such a situation?

Jesus can see that the woman is expressing both sincere repentance and a great affection for Jesus. She is expressing her repentance in the only way that she knows. She is a highly tactile person; it is part of her way of life. To the sexually immature, what she is doing and Jesus’ acceptance of it seems at the very least unbecoming and at the worst bordering on the obscene.

But Jesus says her sins are now forgiven. It was really the passionate love she was showing which indicated that had won forgiveness. Love and sin are incompatible; they cannot co-exist in the same person. She was loving Jesus so much at that moment that she could not be a sinner. Simon could not see this. His concept of sin was purely legalistic. For Jesus it is relational.

At this point her immoral past was totally irrelevant. In our society wrongdoers can be stuck with labels often for the rest of their lives irrespective of how they have changed. God does not work that way. He deals with persons as they are here and now. What I did yesterday does not matter. All that matters is what I am doing now, how I am relating to God and those around me right now.

We remember the man who died beside Jesus on the cross. He had led a terrible life and was now being executed for his crimes. Yet he appeals to Jesus and is promised that he will go to God hand in hand with Jesus. Unfair? Fortunately God’s ideas of fairness are not ours. Otherwise we might be in trouble because of our past.

Once again we see how God, in Jesus, always tries to rehabilitate and not to punish. Punishment destroys. God’s desire is that we be all made whole and experience inner peace and harmony.

Week 24 | Friday

Readings - 1 Timothy 6:2-12; Luke 8:1-3

FIRST READING (1 Timothy 6:2-12)

We come now to the last chapter of this letter. Having told Timothy what he should concentrate on in his teaching, he warns him against those who do not follow the “sound” teachings of Jesus, which are in accordance with true religion.

Paul says that such people are “conceited and ignorant”. They have a weakness for questioning everything and love to argue about words. They have an obsession with polemics and controversy for its own sake.

We still meet such people in our Church today. They do absolutely nothing to help the cause of Christ and the building of the Kingdom. As Paul says they simply create “dissension, slander, evil suspicions”. He calls them “men with twisted minds who have lost all sense of truth” even when they claim to be defending the truth (of which they are, of course, the sole possessors). They can even find fault with the Pope’s orthodoxy, while the Second Vatican Council and its developments are anathema.

The only result of this kind of behaviour is jealousy, incessant arguing, verbal abuse and a deep sense of mistrust. It ends up in unending disputes by people with depraved minds and deprived of the truth, who even see religion as a means of personal gain. They did receive the true message but have wandered far from it. They also regard Paul’s teaching with contempt because he does not ask for money. There are still quite a number of people around who see religion as a good way to make money. What kind of religion it is, is another question.

“Religion, of course, does bring large profits,” says Paul but, paradoxically, only to those who are satisfied with what they have. In other words the profits in question touch the growth of the interior person and not their material advancement. The really rich are those whose needs are the least in the areas of possessions, power and status.

This leads Paul to recommend living our lives with just what we basically need. As he says, we come into the world with nothing and, no matter how much we have accumulated, we leave with nothing.”As long as we have food and clothing, we shall be content with that.” As they say, you can’t take it with you. And, even the having of it in this life can be a source of endless anxiety.

Those who hanker after material wealth are a prey to all kinds of problems; they get trapped into all sorts of foolish and harmful ambitions, which plunge people into ruin and destruction. Paul then quotes a contemporary proverb: “The love of money is the root of all evil.”

Who are the really rich? One thinks of Mahatma Gandhi or Mother Teresa or Paul and many other saints and holy men of all religions. And, of course, of Jesus himself, who just had the clothes on his back and nowhere to lay his head. None of these people were poor in the sense of being deprived. They had everything they needed and much more.

There is no doubt that a great deal of the world’s problems and its miseries arise out of material greed. Or to the determination to hold on to wealth, power and prestige. Most of the world’s international tensions arise from this, causing endless misery to millions. It is called “national security” but it really concerns the security of the “haves”, not to mention the “have lots”.

Even some Christians, Paul says, have abandoned the Way of the Gospel because of their desires for wealth, power and status and “so have given their souls any number of fatal wounds”.

But, as someone called by God to special service, Timothy is urged to keep away from all this. Instead he is to aim to be upright and religious, filled with faith and love, perseverance and gentleness - a repetition of advice given to him earlier.

“Fight the good fight of faith and win the eternal life to which you were called and for which you made your noble profession of faith before many witnesses.” When did Timothy make this “profession of faith”? Perhaps at his baptism or when hands were laid on him for his ministry.

What Paul urges on Timothy are the really precious things and they are the things which really enrich our lives and the lives of others as well. They are other-centred while greed and acquisitiveness are aimed only at oneself. Even some kinds of religions can be seen as primarily for the self. Timothy is urged to keep the long view, the “everlasting life” to which he was called and to which he committed himself.

It is for us today to look at our own lives. Does our following of Christ lead us to the qualities mentioned above or does it make us belligerent and divisive? Or are we trying to combine the best of both worlds, trying to be Christians and people of the world at the same time? A coating of religion on a life that is really no different from what most of the world is living?

What does our lifestyle say about us? What message does it convey to others?

GOSPEL (Luke 8:1-3)

This passage follows immediately from yesterday’s about the sinful woman in the house of Simon the Pharisee. It is one of those summary passages describing in general terms the work of Jesus.

He is accompanied by the chosen Twelve, his co-operators in the preaching of the word and the establishing of the Kingdom. And it is precisely the Good News (the Gospel) about the Kingdom that they are preaching in word and demonstrating in practice.

What is noteworthy here - and it is unique to Luke - is the mention of many women also travelling in the company of Jesus. Some of them were women who had been healed of evil spirits. One is mentioned by name, Mary of Magdala, from whom seven evil spirits had been exorcised. The number seven is not to be taken literally but indicates the woman had formerly been in a seriously immoral state. She appears very prominently in John’s gospel as someone very close to Jesus and he describes her as the first witness of the Resurrection. It is possible, too, that the “sinful woman” in the house of Simon the Pharisee was also in the group.

Some of the other women seem to be of more ample means and higher social rank. One of them was Joanna, the wife of King Herod’s steward. They helped Jesus and his disciples with their material needs. Once again, Jesus is not embarrassed to travel in the company of these women; nor are they uncomfortable in his.

We see here two roles being played by followers of Jesus. On the one hand are the apostles whose function it is to proclaim the Gospel and establish the Kingdom by word and deed, by preaching and by the example of the communal and shared life they are leading.

The other role is that of disciples who are materially better off and who support the work of proclaiming the Gospel by providing for the material and other needs of the evangelisers.

Both roles are complementary and both, taken together, form the evangelising work of the Church.

A good example are the Sisters of Mother Teresa who would never be able to take care of the destitute dying without the generous help of many benefactors. And the same for many other voluntary groups involved in looking after the disadvantaged.

Week 24 | Saturday

Readings - 1 Timothy 6:13-16; Luke 8:4-15

FIRST READING (1 Timothy 6:13-16)

Our last reading from this letter. It is an appeal to Timothy to consecrate his life totally to God and Jesus Christ, in the way that Jesus proclaimed his messianic mission before Pilate. Truly, a model for us to follow. The reading is actually an immediate continuation from yesterday’s reading.

As the Letter comes to an end, Timothy is once more reminded by Paul to follow “with no faults or failures” the instructions that he has been given. Paul makes his statement solemnly in the presence of God, “the source of all life”, and before Jesus Christ, “who witnessed to his noble profession of faith before Pontius Pilate”. It was in the presence of Pilate that Jesus declared his royal messiahship-kingship and his office as revealer of Truth. He said to Pilate: “My Kingdom does not belong to this world” and “anyone committed to the Truth hears my voice” (John 18:36-37). The mention of Pontius Pilate, as a public official, lends strength to the official tone of the witness. This is an example for Christians to follow, whether making a profession of faith at our Baptism or when faced with persecution. It is easy to make professions of faith in private.

Timothy is to keep carrying out these instructions until “the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ”.

The last part of the reading is a doxology in praise of Christ, the Christ of the Second Coming. It may be inspired by a liturgical hymn. It consists of seven scriptural phrases transposed into Hellenic language, the themes being that God is the only object of worship and no one may claim to fully understand the mystery that is God.

Jesus Christ,
who at the due time will be revealed
by God, the blessed and only Ruler of all,
the King of kings and the Lord of lords,
who alone is immortal,

“At the due time” - just as Jesus’ first coming occurred at the precise time God wanted (Gal 4:4), so also his Second Coming will be at God’s appointed time.

whose home is in inaccessible light,
whom no human being has seen or is able to see:
to him be honour and everlasting power. Amen.

“No one has seen or can see”, echoing John’s gospel - “No one has ever seen God.”

It is God the only Son, ever at the Father’s side, who has revealed him” (John 1:18).

(Those who know their Handel will remember the Hallelujah chorus which sings majestically of the “King of kings and Lords of lords”. The phrase also appears in Revelation 19:16.)

Let us today also renew our total commitment to the King of kings and Lord of lords and work for the day when we will be invited to live with him in that now unapproachable light. We could do worse than follow some of the advice that Paul gives to Timothy in this Letter, especially if we have any pastoral responsibilities in our community.

GOSPEL (Luke 8:4-15)

We saw yesterday that Jesus was going around preaching the Good News of the Kingdom, accompanied by his twelve chosen disciples and a number of women who supported the work. Jesus, we are told, is surrounded by people who have come from every nearby city. There is an intimation of universality, ‘catholicism’, about the message he is going to give.

We are given an example of some of the teaching that he was giving them. It takes the form of a parable, the well-known parable of the sower. As in Matthew’s version, the parable is told in two stages. The first is the parable itself. The emphasis is on the sower sowing. He scatters the seed all over - as Jesus is now doing with the people. Some of it falls on the path, some on rocks, some among brambles and some on good soil.

It describes a typical situation in Palestine at the time. The field was largely a public place, at least while it was fallow. So there were paths meandering across it where people took short cuts. The land was not very fertile so there were pieces of rock jutting out of the soil. In the fallow season, it was not looked after and wild plants like brambles grew up. Also, unlike other farming cultures, the sowing took place before the ploughing.

The central message is that, even though some of the seed that the sower plants will wither and die, there is some which will find fertile soil and flourish. So it is with the Word of God and the Word of Jesus. It is a message of confidence and hope for the future of the Kingdom. In the Gospel, it is Jesus’ disciples who are the fertile soil.

As he finished the parable Jesus called out to all, inviting them to hear. He did not mean that they just physically hear. They are meant to listen carefully, to assimilate fully and to implement effectively all that he says. He is the Sower, the seed is the Word, those spoken to are the soil.

Clear and all as it is, the disciples ask for an explanation of the parable. Jesus tells them that the inner secrets of the Kingdom are for them. Why this privilege? Because they are disciples, because they are followers, because they are ready to listen. The rest hear in parables and only in parables: seeing, they do not see; hearing, they do not understand. They do not really want to see or hear because, as the Gospel says elsewhere, if they were to see and understand, they would have to turn their lives around and they are not ready for that.

The disciples are those who have done just that; they have left their boats, their nets and their families, their security and gone with Jesus. That is what seeing and hearing means.

Then follows the explanation which really carries the original parable further than its simple message. In fact, it becomes more like an allegory where each part has a meaning of its own rather than the one point that a parable normally makes. And, whereas in the parable the emphasis was on the sower, here the emphasis is very much on the soil which receives the seed. Each example is made to represent a particular way in which the message is received or not.

The seed that falls on the path is like those who hear the word but it is snatched away from them before they have even a chance to respond. The overwhelming pagan world around them was just too strong an attraction.

The seed that falls on the rock where there may be some moisture in the crevices is like those who hear the word with great enthusiasm and joy (a favourite Lucan term). But they are not able to put down any long-lasting roots and, at the first hint of opposition or temptation, they fall away. They represent the many early Christians who must have given up under the pressures of persecution.

The seed that falls among the brambles represents those who do hear and accept the word. But, gradually the pressure of the secular world and its values is too much. They try to live in both worlds at once but are gradually choked up with concerns about money and material and social wants and the pursuit of pleasure. Eventually, the word dies in them. Many Christians today could identify with this group.

The seed that falls on good soil represents those who hear the word in all openness and accept it fully. The word takes root deep within them and overflows in all kinds of good works.

It is quite clear to which group we are called to belong. To which one, in fact, should I honestly identify myself?

Week 25 | Monday

Ezra 1:1-6; Luke 8:16-18

We go back to the Old Testament today and begin the first of just three readings from the Book of Ezra. And, indeed, for the next three weeks - up to the end of Week 27 - we will be having selected readings from eight books, some historical and some prophetical, of the period after the Israelites had returned to Jerusalem from their exile in Babylon. This followed the defeat of the Babylonians by the Persians, who had become the latest ‘super-power’ in the region.

In order to put the readings in context, we begin with an extract from an introduction given by the Jerusalem Bible:

Ezra is part of a second group of historical books which in large measure reduplicate but ultimately extend the ‘Deuteronomic’ history beginning with Joshua and ending with Kings. These are the two Books of Chronicles, then the Book of Ezra, and the Book of Nehemiah. Originally, the two books of Chronicles were one book and those of Ezra and Nehemiah were part of the same collection, the whole being the work of one author, known as “the Chronicler”.

The Book of Ezra is a continuation of Chronicles story. After the 50 years of Exile, on which he is silent, the author resumes his history with the edict of the Persian King Cyrus, 538 BC, permitting the Jews to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple. The return begins forthwith, but the work of rebuilding is halted by the hostility of the Samaritans and does not resume until the reign of King Darius I. The Temple is finished in 515 BC.

Under King Artaxerxes, the scribe Ezra, representative for Jewish affairs at the Persian court, arrives in Jerusalem with a new contingent of returning exiles, bringing with him an official authorisation to impose the Mosaic Law, now approved by the king. He has to take severe measures against those Jews already married to foreigners, Ezra 7-10. The story continues with the Book of Nehemiah, which we will be reading from in the coming weeks.

These books are important for the history of the Jewish Restoration after the Exile. The first chapters of Ezra complement the information supplied by prophets Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi (all of whom we will be looking at during these three weeks).

Taking advantage of the liberal religious policy that the Achmenids (Persian dynasty) applied in their empire, the Jews return to their Promised Land, restore the ancient worship, rebuild the Temple and the city walls, and live as a community governed by men of their own race and regulated by the Law of Moses. All that the imperial power requires is loyalty, no great price to pay when that power shows such respect for Jewish customs. This is an event of great importance - nothing less than the birth of Judaism, prepared by long meditation in Exile and assisted by the actions of leaders raised up by God. . .

The real father of Judaism is Ezra with his three dominant conceptions: the chosen race, the Temple, the Law. If his reforming measures seem severe and his isolationism narrow, it is because his zeal was great and the need to safeguard the infant community urgent. He is the pattern of all scribes, the great and growing hero of Judaic tradition. . .

In today’s reading, which comes from its opening lines, we see Cyrus, King of Persia, authorising the return of the Jews to Jerusalem.

We are told that it was in the first year of the reign of King Cyrus of Persia and in fulfilment of a prophecy of Jeremiah, that Yahweh inspired the king to issue a solemn proclamation which was displayed throughout his kingdom.

Cyrus, the founder of the Persian empire, reigned over the Persians from autumn of 559 until 530 BC. He is one of the great kings of ancient times but what is most significant here is that he is depicted as being merely an instrument of God to serve his people. Isaiah speaks of him as the Lord’s “shepherd” and his “anointed”. Compared to the Assyrian and Babylonian rulers, Cyrus was looked on very favourably by the Israelites, first, for overthrowing the Babylonian rule and, more importantly, allowing them to return to their homeland.

The “first year” here refers to Cyrus’ rule over Babylon, which began in March-April (Nisan) 538 BC, after he captured the city in October 539, 20 years after he came to the Persian throne.

Jeremiah, writing during the years of exile, had prophesied a 70-year Babylonian captivity (Jer 25:11-12; 29:10). The first deportation to Babylon began in 605, in the third year of King Jehoiakim, and, in 538, approximately 70 years later, the people began their return.

Cyrus then makes a solemn proclamation authorising the Hebrews to return to their homeland.

In the proclamation Cyrus declares that Yahweh, “the God of heaven”, has given him all the kingdoms of the earth and appointed him to build a Temple in Jerusalem, in Judah. This oral proclamation of Cyrus’ decree was written in Hebrew, the language of the Israelite captives.

‘God of heaven’ is a phrase which occurs 22 times in the Old Testament, 17 of which are in Ezra, Nehemiah and Daniel. Notice, too, the emphatic emphasis on Jerusalem and the Temple with nothing else mentioned about the homeland. We find this in both Ezra and Nehemiah. The restoration of the Temple and the Law was synonymous with national restoration.

Unlike the preceding imperial regimes, the Persian kings were on the whole extremely sympathetic towards the religions of their subjected peoples; they reinstated and actively supported them while keeping a measure of control. Their attitude towards the Jewish religion was no exception. It is possible that Judaism further benefited because of the Persians’ special devotion to ‘the gods of heaven’. Yahweh, who in the official documents is always referred to as ‘the God of heaven’ may have been thought of as the supreme god acknowledged by the Persian kings. (Not unlike Jews, Christians and Muslims acknowledging the one and the same God.)

He then addresses each Israelite: “Whoever among you belongs to the full tally of his people, may his God be with him!” He should go up to Jerusalem and build the “Temple of Yahweh, God of Israel, who is the God in Jerusalem”.

‘May his God be with him’ - Cyrus instituted the policy of placating the gods of his subject peoples instead of carrying off their cult images as the Assyrians and the Babylonians had done earlier. We should note too that his generosity to the Jews was paralleled by his benevolence to the conquered Babylonians.

The ‘full tally of his people’ seems to exclude exiles from the Northern Kingdom; those going back to Jerusalem all belong to the Southern Kingdom (Judah)

Furthermore, each Hebrew survivor, wherever he may live, is to be helped by the local people with silver, gold, equipment, riding beasts and valuable gifts and, in addition, with voluntary offerings for the building of the Temple in Jerusalem. These voluntary offerings would be vital in the restoration of the ruined Temple and its services. (And they included, by order of the king, the restoration of Temple treasures looted by Nebuchadnezzar.)

This edict appears in the form of a proclamation, in Hebrew, by public heralds to the exiled Jews and was no doubt drawn up by Jews employed in the Persian chancellery.

Then the heads of all the families from the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, with the priests and Levites - and all those “whose spirit had been roused by God” - made preparations to go and rebuild the Temple. ‘Families’ here means extended families, more like the whole clan whose authority figure was the patriarch, as ‘family head’. The tribes of Judah and Benjamin were the main tribes from the Kingdom of Judah, the Southern Kingdom, in which Jerusalem was situated.

And finally, in conformity with the king’s decree, all the Israelites’ neighbours rallied round with all kinds of material help and gifts, as well as with voluntary donations.

Cyrus and his successors represent a period of enlightened tolerance when people like the Jews and other religions were able to maintain or restore their religious practices and traditions.

While, on the one hand, we should not see God as a kind of puppet master who manipulates people at will, we also need to realise that all of us are called to carry out God’s plan for the world and that there is no way we can frustrate that plan.

We will pray today for a clear picture of God’s will in our lives and the strength to accept it and carry it out. Our own greatest benefit is in making God’s will ours.

We might also remember today all peoples who are prevented from the practice of their religion in peace with their neighbours and, even more, people who have had to flee their homeland because of religious persecution.

GOSPEL (Luke 8:16-18)

The message today seems clear enough. The Gospel message is not meant to be kept hidden.

We are not a ‘mystery religion’ in the sense that the Gospel is only for initiates. It is a message that is to be proclaimed from the housetops. If what we believe and say is true it will prevail. We understand Jesus to be the Light of the world and his followers are also to be like lamps shining out for all the world to see. An invisible Christian is a contradiction in terms, yet there are strong tendencies for us “to keep our religion to ourselves and not foist it on others”.

Forcing others to believe is not on, even if it were possible. Inviting people to “come and see”, to hear the message and have a personal experience of living it is something else. We also believe that the Gospel message offers a way of life that brings great happiness into the lives of individuals and of whole societies if it is really followed. So, part of our communicating the message is as much through our lifestyle (“See! it works!”) as through what we say.

“Take heed, therefore, HOW you hear,” says Jesus today. It has to be a hearing which understands, accepts, assimilates and puts into practice. What is heard and assimilated has to be passed on. Otherwise it dies. But “to the one who has, more will be given”. And “he who has not [because he has not been hearing and absorbing properly] will lose even the little he has”.

To be a Christian is not to reach a certain level and stay there; it essentially means constant growth and development. To stay still or to stagnate is to go back.

Week 25 | Tuesday

FIRST READING (Ezra 6:7-8,12,14-20)

In spite of the proclamation which King Cyrus had made about the return of the Jews to Jerusalem and the rebuilding of the Temple, they met with many difficulties, especially from the Samaritans who were living there.

Today we find ourselves in chapter 6. Cyrus has been replaced by another great Persian king, Darius. He orders a search for a document deposited in the treasuries of Babylon which confirms an order that had been given by Cyrus for work to begin on the Temple.

It includes some instructions on the design of the Temple building; the cost of building is to come from the royal treasury; and the gold and silver articles which King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon had taken were to be returned. Then the governor of Transeuphrates (that is, the part of the Persian Empire to the west of the River Euphrates) and his assistants are told to stay away from the site and (our reading begins at this point). . .

. . .”leave the governor of the Jews and the elders of the Jews alone, to get on with their work on that Temple of God.” The Jews have full permission to rebuild the Temple on its original site. But the central government will provide help. In fact, the cost of the construction is to be paid in full from the royal revenue, from taxes collected in Transeuphrates and without interruption.

It was a consistent policy of Persian kings to help restore sanctuaries in their empire. For example, a memorandum concerning the rebuilding of the Jewish temple at Elephantine was written by the Persian governors of Judah and Samaria. Also from non-Biblical sources we learn that Cyrus repaired temples at Uruk (Erech) and Ur. Cambyses, successor to Cyrus, gave funds for the temple at Sais in Egypt. The temple of Amun in the Khargah Oasis was rebuilt by order of Darius.

Darius then pledges in the name of the God who lives in Jerusalem (not his god) that he will overthrow the king of any people who dares to defy this decree and destroy that Temple of God in Jerusalem.

The Transeuphrates governor followed the king’s instructions to the letter and “the elders of the Jews made good progress over their building, thanks to the prophetic activity of the prophet Haggai and Zechariah son of Iddo, completing the reconstruction in accordance with the command of the God of Israel and the order of Cyrus and of Darius [and of Artaxerxes, king of Persia]”.

In fact, work on the temple had made little progress not only because of opposition from people like the neighbouring Samaritans but also because of the preoccupation of the returnees with building their own homes. Because they were placing their own interests first, God sent them famine as a judgment. However, spurred on by the preaching of the prophets Haggai and Zechariah, and under the leadership of Zerubbabel, governor of Jerusalem, and Joshua, the high priest, a new effort was begun.

The reference to Artaxerxes seems out of place (hence the brackets), because he did not contribute to the rebuilding of the temple at this time. He may have been inserted here since he contributed to the work of the temple at a later date under Ezra (7:21-24).

The Temple was finally completed on the 23rd day of the month of Adar, in the sixth year of the reign of King Darius. By our calendar that would be April 1, 515 BC. This Temple, remodelled by Herod the Great (cf. John 2:20), was in use for 585 years and was destroyed by Titus in 70 AD, never again to be rebuilt.

One commentator makes the following observation about the ‘new’ Temple:

Almost 70 years after its destruction the renewed work on the temple had begun on Sept 21, 520 (Hag 1:15), and sustained effort had continued for almost three and a half years. According to Haggai (2:3), the older members who could remember the splendour of Solomon’s temple were disappointed when they saw the smaller size of Zerubbabel’s temple (cf. Ezr 3:12). Yet in the long run the second temple, though not as grand as the first, enjoyed a much longer life. The general plan of the second temple was similar to that of Solomon’s, but the Most Holy Place was left empty because the Ark of the Covenant had been lost through the Babylonian conquest. According to Josephus, on the Day of Atonement the high priest placed his censer on the slab of stone that marked the former location of the ark. The Holy Place was furnished with a table for the bread of the Presence, the incense altar, and one [seven-branched] lampstand (cf. 1 Maccabees 1:21-22; 4:49-51) instead of Solomon’s ten (1 Kings 7:49). (New International Version Study Bible)

After the construction was complete, the Israelites - the priests, the Levites and the remainder of the exiles - joyfully celebrated the dedication of this Temple of God.

The ‘remainder of the exiles’ is the Remnant spared by God and now returned from exile. It was the leaders of those who had returned from exile that were responsible for the completion of the temple.”Dedication” translates the Aramaic word hanukkah. The Jewish holiday in December that celebrates the recapture of the temple from the Seleucid kings and its re-dedication (165 BC) is also known as ‘Hanukkah’ but is the celebration of a different dedication from Ezra’s.

The dedication of the Temple was celebrated with a spectacular sacrifice of animals: 100 bulls, 200 rams, 400 lambs and then, as a sin-offering, 12 he-goats representing the 12 tribes of Israel. The numbers seem huge yet pale in comparison with services in the reign of Solomon, Hezekiah and Josiah, when the animals were numbered in thousands rather than hundreds.

The priests were then installed in their orders and the Levites in their positions for ministry in the Temple, following the instructions of Moses (e. g. Exod 9; Lev 8). The priests were divided into 24 divisions, each of which served at the Temple for a week at a time. (We remember how the angel spoke to Zechariah in the Temple announcing the birth of John the Baptist, when it was the turn of his ‘order’ to function, Luke 1:8.) In 1962 fragments of a synagogue inscription listing the 24 divisions were found at Caesarea.

The returned exiles also celebrated their first Passover after 70 years on the traditional date, 14th day of the first month (Nisan). It would have been about April 21, 516 BC. And, in preparation for this celebration, the Levites had all purified themselves so that they could make the Passover sacrifice for their brothers, the priests, and for themselves. This explains why the priest and the Levite passed by on the other side in Jesus’ parable of the Good Samaritan. They were on their way to the Temple in Jerusalem and their ritual purity took priority over their helping a brother lying injured (and bleeding) on the roadside. For Jesus the needs of the brother are the first priority. That is why the stranger and outsider, the Samaritan, is the ‘neighbour’. He is the “one who shows compassion”.

The Levites are also represented as slaughtering the paschal victims, because for a long time this had been done by ‘laymen’ (cf. Deut 16:2; Exod 12:6). The urge to ‘clericalism’ is very strong!

Reading this passage we realise it is very difficult to put a permanent end to God’s work. Our churches, too, have experienced and still experience persecution, exile and the destruction of places of worship again and again, only to see them restored.

The truth, wherever it is, will always prevail. It is the foundation of our faith and our hope.

GOSPEL (Luke 8:19-21)

The mother and brothers of Jesus come looking for him but they cannot get to him because of the crush of people in the house where he is speaking. Jesus was in Capernaum at the time and Nazareth was about 50 km (30 miles) away. The mention of ‘brothers’ would commonly indicate cousins and not just siblings. When the message is passed in to Jesus, he says to all: “My mother and my brothers are those who hear the word of God and act on it.”

The story is told in harsher terms in Mark. He has Jesus say, for instance: “Who is my mother; who are my brothers and sisters?” It is suggested there that their purpose was to take him away. On the one hand, they thought he was mad and an embarrassment to the family and, secondly, that he might get them into trouble with the authorities because of the provocative things he was saying and doing such as questioning traditional interpretations of the Law. (We see a similar embarrassment on the part of the parents of the man born blind in John chap. 9. They refuse to speak to the authorities about their son: “He is big enough; he can speak for himself.”)

Luke’s account is softer and just focuses on the saying of Jesus. In fact, Luke has taken this passage out of its context in Mark (3:31-35) and turns it into a conclusion to his short section on the parables. And he modifies Mark’s “Anyone who does the will of God is my brother and sister” to match the end of his parable of the sower (the seed that falls in rich soil represents those “who have heard the word and take it to themselves”, v. 15) by having Jesus say: “My mother and my brothers are those who hear the word of God and act on it.”

To a society which regarded itself as God’s chosen people merely by birth and an external ritual like circumcision Jesus asserts that belonging to God has little to do with blood or race but only with the relationship one establishes with God.

There is a lot of meaning in the words of the message: “Your mother and your brothers are standing outside. . .” It was clear from their behaviour that they were not, like the seed falling on fertile soil, ‘hearing’ him and so they were outsiders. Those who really ‘hear’, no matter who they are or where they come from, are ‘insiders’ and belong to the family of Jesus.

Of course, we know elsewhere, especially from Luke’s gospel, that Mary is not being condemned here - whatever about other family members. In fact, this is where her greatness really lies. Clearly it partly lies in her being chosen to be the mother of God’s Son but perhaps even more in her saying ‘Yes’ (“Let it happen to me according to your word”), in her unswerving faithfulness to that ‘Yes’ and in her standing by her Son to the very end when all the rest had fled.

When, on another occasion, she was indirectly praised for being the mother of such a Son, Jesus had spoken in words very similar to today: “No, blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and keep it.”

Our discipleship, too, is not determined by our being born into a Catholic family or just by being baptised or by observing the external requirements of our religion but by our total commitment to the Gospel and to an unconditional following of Jesus. Only then can we truly be said to be his brother or sister.

Week 25 | Wednesday

FIRST READING (Ezra 9:5-9)

In our last reading from Ezra, Ezra himself speaks. It is both a deeply felt prayer and an exhortation to his people. He is deeply upset because they have been so unfaithful. He is particularly disturbed that many have intermarried with the unbelieving and idolatrous people around them.

He tells us that at the evening sacrifice, he came out of a stupor. Just before this Ezra has been told that many of the people, including even priests and Levites, have intermarried with women from the non-Jewish (and non-believing) tribes. The result is that the “holy race” has become contaminated and hence liable to fall into the idolatrous practices of their wives.

Actually, in ancient Israel inter-ethnic marriages were not forbidden (cf. one example, Gen 41:45, where Joseph marries an Egyptian woman), but were later forbidden by Deuteronomy in order to combat idolatry, which Gentile women tended to bring with them into the home. The danger increased after the Exile because the majority of the returning exiles were men. The reason for the separation is still religious but a second reason now emerges here, concern for racial purity.

On hearing all this, Ezra tears his clothes, pulls the hair from his head and beard, and sits down in horror. All who felt the same way about the infidelity shown to God gathered round him in sympathy and support, while Ezra remained sitting there in horror until the evening sacrifice.

At the evening sacrifice, he comes out of his wretched state and, in his torn clothes, falls on his knees, stretches out his hands to Yahweh and begins to pray. The prayer of Ezra, which is also a sermon, is inspired by Deuteronomy and the prophets. It may be compared with those of Nehemiah (Neh 9:5-37) and Daniel (Dan 9:4-19).

In the name of his people, he tells God how ashamed he is, how he blushes even to lift his face to God. He is ashamed for the terrible sins of his people which are now “higher than our heads” and whose guilt has reached right up to heaven.

This is nothing new for God’s people. From the days of their ancestors until now they have been deeply guilty. The Israelites had a strong sense of their corporate solidarity with their ancestors.

Because of their iniquities, they, together with their kings and priests, have been handed over to the kings of other countries, have died by the sword, been taken away into captivity, been pillaged and looted - and reduced to shame. This is still the case. Much of this suffering was the result of their sins and infidelities. In Ezekiel “the sword of the king of Babylon” (21:19) is described as an instrument of divine judgement.

In spite of all this, now, for a brief moment, the favour of Yahweh their God has allowed a remnant to escape from exile and given them a stable home in his holy place, so that their God can raise their spirits and revive them a little in their slavery. The literal reading of a ‘stable home’ is a ‘nail’ or a ‘peg’, evoking the image of a nail driven firmly into a wall or a peg driven well into the ground.

However, in spite of somewhat better times now, they are still slaves under a foreign ruler. But God has not forgotten them in their slavery. He has extended his faithful love for them even under the kings of Persia and revived them to rebuild the Temple of our God, restore its ruins and provide them with a refuge in Judah and Jerusalem.

The Achaemenid Persian kings were favourably disposed to Jews (as they were to other religions): Cyrus (539-530 BC) gave them permission to return (Ezra 1); his son Cambyses (530-522), though not named in the Scriptures, also favoured the Jews, as we learn from Elephantine papyri; Darius I (522-486) renewed the decree of Cyrus (Esra 6); his son Xerxes (486-465) granted privileges and protection to Jews (Esther 8-10); his son Artaxerxes (465-424) gave authorisations to Ezra (Ezra 7) 7) and to Nehemiah (Neh 2).

In God’s strange providence, it was the enlightened policy of the pagan Persian emperors which had made it possible for God’s sinful people to return to Jerusalem and rebuild their temple. In many ways, it was this exile which helped them appreciate what they had lost. God, too, can make strange and unlikely people be the agents of his bringing us back to him.

In our lives, too, there can be painful experiences. They can either embitter us and drive us deeper into ourselves or we can go through them and see that God in his love and compassion is present there. We then turn such experiences into opportunities for personal growth and deepening our sensitivity for the sufferings of others.

GOSPEL (Luke 9:1-6)

As we move on to chapter 9, we have left out a number of stories in chapter 8 - the calming of a storm on the lake, the healing of a demoniac, the raising of Jairus’ daughter and the healing of a woman with a haemorrhage. However, they are dealt with elsewhere in our readings from the other gospels. We are now moving into a turning point in the public life of Jesus and in his relationship with his disciples.

This is, in fact, the third tour of Galilee by Jesus. On the first tour he was accompanied just by the four fishermen he had called first - Peter, Andrew, James and John. On the second all the Twelve were with him and, on the third, he was alone after sending out the Twelve on their own mission.

We begin the chapter today with Jesus sending his chosen Twelve on their mission. It is the first time he has sent them out on their own without his being with them. Basically, they are to do exactly as their Master does. They are given power over evil forces and to heal sicknesses. They are also to proclaim the Good News of the Kingdom.

They are to travel in total freedom and so are not to bring anything with them which would make travelling more difficult. No walking staff, or purse, or food, or money, nor even a change of clothing. It is understood that the people will support them in return for the services they render. It is expected that hospitality will be extended to them in the traditional way of the Middle East.

And they are not to be choosy about where they are received; they are to stay in the first house that accepts them. And, in places where they and their message and their services are not welcome, they will shake the dust off their feet. This was a symbolic act which the Pharisees practised when they left an “unclean” Gentile area. In this case, the act signifies that people are not just rejecting the disciples but God himself, Whom they bring with their message and their healing.

And so they went out, from town to town, proclaiming the Good News and restoring people to wholeness wherever they went. It really was the beginning of the Church. And it was the work of making the Kingdom a reality, God’s will being “done on earth”.

The same mission is entrusted to each one of us although it will obviously be adapted to our life situation. We are called, individually and in community, to proclaim the Gospel by word and lifestyle. We are called to help liberate people from the negative forces, addictions of all kinds that can enslave. We are called to be sources of healing and wholeness and for this we do not need to be part of the medical profession. We are called to live lives of simplicity, using only those things which we need for life and work and rejecting all superfluity and luxury. As we have already noted: the really rich are those whose needs are the least. It is a message our consumer world needs to hear and see.

Week 25 | Thursday

FIRST READING (Haggai 1:1-8)

For these two days we take our readings from Haggai, one of the lesser known of the so-called Minor Prophets. The whole book consists of only two chapters and both our readings will be taken from the first chapter.

The Jerusalem Bible notes:

The last, post-exilic, period of prophecy opens with Haggai. The change is striking. Before the Exile the watchword of the prophets was Punishment. During the Exile it became Consolation. Now it is Restoration. Haggai appears at a critical moment in the development of Judaism; the birth of the new Palestinian community. His short exhortations are precisely dated, August and September of 520. The first Jews to return from Babylonia to rebuild the Temple were quickly discouraged. The prophets Haggai and Zechariah stirred them to new efforts and urged Zerubbabel the governor and the High Priest Joshua to resume work on the Temple. This was done in September, 520 BC.

The four brief discourses composing this book are entirely concerned with this. Since the Temple is still in ruins Yahweh has destroyed the harvests; its rebuilding will usher in the age of prosperity. However unimposing, this new Temple will dim the glory of the old; and power is promised to Zerubbabel, the chosen one of God. This Temple, therefore and this descendant of David become the focus of a messianic hope that will be more clearly expressed in Zechariah.

The New International Version Study Bible also gives a brief historical background which helps to contextualise today’s reading:

Haggai was a prophet who, along with Zechariah, encouraged the returned exiles to rebuild the temple (see Ezra 5:1-2;6:14). ‘Haggai’ means ‘festal’, which may indicate that the prophet was born during one of the three pilgrimage feasts (Unleavened Bread, Pentecost or Weeks, and Tabernacles). Based on 2:3 Haggai may have witnessed the destruction of Solomon’s temple. If so, he must have been in his early 70s during his ministry. . .

In 538 BC the conqueror of Babylon, Cyrus king of Persia, issued a decree allowing the Jews to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the temple. Led by Zerubbabel, about 50,000 Jews journeyed home and began work on the temple. About two years later (536) they completed the foundation amid great rejoicing. Their success aroused the Samaritans and other neighbours who feared the political and religious implications of a rebuilt temple in a thriving Jewish state. They therefore opposed the project vigorously and managed to halt work until Darius the Great became king of Persia in 522 BC. Darius was interested in the religions of his empire, and Haggai and Zechariah began to preach in his second year, 520 BC. The Jews were more to blame for their inactivity than their opponents, and Haggai tried to arouse them from their lethargy. When the governor of Transeuphrates and other officials tried to interfere with the rebuilding efforts, Darius fully supported the Jews. In 516 BC the temple was finished and dedicated. Next to Obadiah, Haggai is the shortest book in the Old Testament.

Today’s reading finds us in the same period as the Book of Ezra which we have just been reading. King Darius is the emperor of Persia. It is the first day of the sixth month (August/September) in the year 520 BC and the second year of his reign. The New Moon was the day on which prophets were sometimes consulted.

King Darius Hystaspis (or Hystaspes) ruled Persia from 522 to 486 BC. As a historical footnote, it was who prepared the trilingual inscription on the Behistun (Bisitun) cliff wall (located in modern Iran), through which cuneiform languages were later deciphered.

Haggai, the Lord’s prophet, has a message from Yahweh for the governor of Judah, Zerubbabel, son of Shealtiel, and for the high priest, Joshua, son of Jehozadak. In 1 Chronicles we are told that Jehozakak was taken away into captivity by Nebuchadnezzar.

The Lord’s message is clear. He wants his Temple to be built but “these people” are saying the time has not yet come for the rebuilding, even though the foundations had been laid 16 years previously, in 536 BC. They have other priorities, like the building of their own houses. Because of their sin, the nation is not called “my people”.

And Yahweh asks: How can the people live in panelled houses while the Lord’s dwelling place is in ruins? The luxury of the homes of the wealthy with their panelled houses contrasts sadly with the ruined state of the Lord’s home. Panelled houses were usually connected with royal dwellings, which had cedar panelling. There seems to be an element of sarcasm in the Lord’s question. It also reminds one of David’s embarrassment about living in a palace while the Ark of the Covenant was still confined to a tent: “Here I am living in a house of cedar, while the Ark of God dwells in a tent!” (2 Sam 7:2). It seems the returned exiles did not have any such qualms.

Now comes a warning about their self-centred lifestyle.”Think carefully about your behaviour.” They are living a life of conspicuous consumption, like people living it high while debts mount on their credit cards.”You have sown much and harvested little; you eat but never have enough, drink but never have your fill, put on clothes but feel no warmth. The wage earner gets his wages only to put them in a bag with a hole in it.” (Not a bad image of credit card culture.)

They have planted abundantly but have been punished by famine when the harvests never materialised. Because of that, they live lives which give no satisfaction, no matter how active they are. They earn wages but they disappear when prices soar during time of famine.

Instead, let them get down to the task of rebuilding the Lord’s house. Let them go up into the hills of Judah and get the timber for building. Perhaps wood from the hills around Jerusalem was to supplement the cedar wood already purchased from Lebanon. Once the Lord’s House is complete, he shall take pleasure in the sacrifices offered there and reveal his glory to his people.

The reading is a wake-up call to us about our priorities. How are we building the “house of the Lord”? Do we take care of our own priorities first and then wonder about what God wants as an after-thought? St Ignatius Loyola in his Spiritual Exercises speaks of people organising their own lives according to their own desires and likes and then, when everything is set, think about wondering what God might want. In fact, it should be the other way round.

The rich man in the Gospel made his money first and then asked Jesus what he should do to gain eternal life. When told that he needed to get rid of his wealth and share it with the needy, he could not do it.

GOSPEL (Luke 9:7-9)

Today we have a short interlude which is leading to some very special revelations.

Herod the tetrarch (his father Herod the Great’s kingdom had been divided among four sons) is hearing stories about what Jesus is doing. ‘Tetrarch’ means the ruler of the fourth part of a kingdom. This one, Herod Antipas, was one of several sons; the kingdom was divided among four of them. Herod Antipas ruled over Galilee and Perea from 4 BC to 39 AD. Although not strictly speaking a ‘king’ he is called that in Matthew and Mark following popular usage.

Herod is puzzled because he is being told that Jesus is John the Baptist risen from the dead. At the same time others are saying that Elijah, whose expected return would signal the arrival of the Messiah, or some of the former biblical prophets has reappeared. Herod has recently beheaded John the Baptist and the superstitious king is filled with a mixture of fear and curiosity. He “kept trying to see Jesus”.

Luke does not actually record the death of John and, in this short passage, he prepares the reader for the later meeting of Herod with Jesus (23:8-12). So Herod’s wish will be partially fulfilled at a later date though under very unexpected circumstances and in a way that Herod will find very unsatisfactory. He is hoping that Jesus, like some circus dog, will do some ‘tricks’ or ‘miracles’ for him. [In the musical ‘Jesus Christ Superstar’ Herod asks Jesus to walk across his swimming pool. ]

Herod’s desire was almost entirely one of curiosity, it was the desire of the hedonist and the seeker of novelty. To see Jesus, in the full Gospel sense, is something totally other. It can only happen to those who have the eyes of faith and who can see in the person of Jesus the presence and power of God. We may recall the request of some “Greeks” who told Philip they wanted to see Jesus and the reply that Jesus gave about the grain of wheat falling into the ground and dying (John 12:20-26). We have not seen Jesus if we do not know him in his suffering and dying as his way to new life.

Let us ask to see Jesus today, a seeing that leads to a total acceptance of his way of life and following him all the way, through the cross and beyond to a life that never ends.

Week 25 | Friday

Readings - Haggai 1:15-2:9; Luke 9:18-22

FIRST READING (Haggai 1:15-2:9)

Another exhortation from the prophet to the returned exiles in Jerusalem. It is a message from God through the mouth of the prophet and directed especially to Zerubbabel, the governor of the city, and Joshua, the high priest.

In the second year of King Darius’ reign, on the 21st day of the seventh month the word of Yahweh was again addressed through the prophet Haggai. It is more than a year after the first prophecy which we read about yesterday - October 17, 520 BC and the last day of the feast of Tabernacles. It was on this feast that Solomon had dedicated the original temple (1 Kings 8:2). It was also a time to celebrate the summer harvest, though for the returned exiles the crops have been meagre (a sign of God’s displeasure at the people’s reluctance to get to work on the rebuilding of the Temple).

In speaking to Zerubbabel the governor, Joshua the high priest, and the Remnant of Israel, Haggai is to ask them if there is anyone among them “who saw this Temple in its former glory”. And what do they see now? Does it not look as if there is nothing there at all?

It was possible that some of the older exiles, even including Haggai himself, had actually seen Solomon’s magnificent temple, which had been destroyed by the Babylonians some 66 years earlier. In any case, others would have heard parents or elders talk nostalgically about its glories. Haggai had asked if any of them had seen this Temple in its former glory. He was referring to the new building which was seen as a continuation of Solomon’s. And what did they see in the new building? Almost nothing. That is because after the foundations had been laid no further work had been done

But now Yahweh, through his prophet, urges Zerubbabel, Joshua and all the returned exiles to have courage and get to work on completing the temple building. Because Yahweh is with them. David had given his son Solomon similar words of encouragement in the building of his temple.

“My spirit is present among you. Do not be afraid.” The same God who helped Solomon build his temple will empower Zerubbabel and the people. Similarly, the Spirit of God had rested on Moses and the 70 elders as they led the people out of Egypt and through the desert.

Then comes a prophecy proper: “For Yahweh Sabaoth says this: ‘A little while now, and I shall shake the heavens and the earth, the sea and the dry land’.”

For Haggai, God is the sole master of history. While the prophet is foretelling the disaster which is to introduce the new era, the world is temporarily at peace under the rule of Darius. The imminent worldwide catastrophe and the rebuilding of the Temple will herald the messianic age. From the later period of Ezekiel’s preaching onward, the Temple became, as here, a dominant messianic theme.

The prophet’s words are an announcement of the coming of God’s judgement on the nations - which the fall of Persia to Alexander the Great (333-330 BC) will foreshadow. The Letter to the Hebrews (12:26-27) links this verse to the judgment of the nations at the second coming of Christ. The background for the shaking of the nations here and in vv. 21-22 is the judgment on Egypt at the Red Sea. In vv. 21-22 we read: “I am going to shake the heavens and the earth. I shall overturn the thrones of kingdoms and destroy the power of the kings of the nations. I shall overthrow the chariots and their crews; horses and their riders will fall, every one to the sword of his comrade.”

The prophet continues with the word of Yahweh: “I shall shake all the nations, and the treasures of all the nations will flow in, and I shall fill this Temple with glory,” says Yahweh Sabaoth.”Mine is the silver, mine is the gold!’ - Yahweh Sabaoth declares.”

‘Glory’ can refer to material splendour or to the presence of God. The latter reference connects the glory of the Lord with the cloud that filled the sanctuary. When Christ came to the earthly temple, God’s presence was evident as never before. When Jesus was brought to the Temple for the first time as an infant to be presented to his Father, he was met by the holy man Simeon who spoke of the Child as “a revealing Light to the Gentiles, the glory of your people Israel” (see Luke 2:27,32).

Haggai’s speaking of the future filling of the Temple with glory points ultimately to Christ who will enter it several times during his life - each time making a significant statement about himself and his mission for his Father. Ultimately, though, as he dies on the Cross, the glory will leave the Temple, the veil of the Holy of Holies will be thrown open to reveal an emptiness. From now on, God has a special presence in his new Temple, the Body of his Risen Son.

“The glory of this new Temple will surpass that of the old,” says Yahweh Sabaoth, “and in this place I shall give peace” - Yahweh Sabaoth declares. The Temple now has become a focal point of messianic hope, a hope realised in Jesus. It is in this same second Temple of Zerubbabel, though restorations had been made by King Herod, that Jesus will teach. And that is why this Temple will enjoy greater glory than Solomon’s temple because the longed-for Messiah would be present there.

In our own Catholic faith, we have magnificent churches, some of them among the greatest artistic achievements of the human race. And yet, when it comes to glory, they are no whit greater than the straw-roofed hut in some mission station. For the glory comes not from the building but from the Presence in the tabernacle and from the community, which as the Body of Christ celebrates its Eucharist there.

The church building is holy because God’s people make it so and not the other way round. It is only as holy as they are.

GOSPEL (Luke 9:18-22)

After the incident concerning Herod, which, as we saw, is a pointer to things yet to happen, the disciples return from their mission. What follows is omitted from our readings. In fact, Jesus took them to a quiet place where they could rest and reflect on what they had been doing. However, they were pursued by the ever-hungry crowds and Jesus fed them with the Word of God, with his healing and finally, through his disciples (“You give them to eat”) with bread and fish. The story is another step in the Twelve’s involvement in the mission of Jesus and it leads into today’s reading.

We find Jesus praying alone. As we have already seen, it is something that Luke mentions a number of times about Jesus and especially before significant events in his public life. Some people might wonder what Jesus would have to pray about. Such a question could reveal a rather limited idea of prayer, e. g. as something you do when you want to get something from God or when you are depressed or in trouble of some kind.

But prayer is ultimately getting in touch with God and that is something that Jesus would surely want to do a lot. Prayer is also a way of discovering just where God’s will enters one’s life and that is something that was always of supreme importance to Jesus.”I and the Father are one.”

Jesus, we are told, was not altogether alone. His disciples were with him. Were they praying too? Later, they will ask Jesus to teach them how to pray.

All of this is Luke’s introduction to a high point in all the Synoptics: the revelation of Jesus’ true identity. From the other Synoptics we know that it took place at Caesarea Philippi, a mixed Jewish-Gentile region outside Herod’s territory.

“Whom do people say I am?” Jesus asks them. They give various answers: John the Baptist (resurrected) or Elijah, expected to return to announce the imminent coming of the Messiah, or some other of the earlier great prophets.

But then he asks, “Who do you say I am?” Peter, answering for all of them, replies simply: “The Christ of God.” “Christ” is not a name but a title. It comes from the Greek christos (cristos) which means “anointed”. And Christos is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew ‘Messiah’. The anointing indicates someone who is king and, in this case, the One who is anointed the Saviour King of Israel.

In short, Peter is saying that the man standing before him is the long-awaited Saviour of the Jewish people. It is a dramatic development in Jesus’ relationship with his disciples.

His next words at first sight seem unexpected and contradictory. He strictly orders his disciples not to say anything of this to anyone. Surely they should be doing the exact opposite? But the people are not yet ready for this revelation. They have a very limited and preconceived idea of what the coming of the Messiah will mean. They see him in very political terms as a kind of national liberator who will drive out and destroy the Romans and all enemies of the Jewish people and restore the past glories of Israel.

Even after the Resurrection Luke has Jesus’ own disciples them asking him, “Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?” (Acts 1:6). Their ideas, even at this late date, are no different from the ordinary people’s. At this point in the Gospel, they must be secretly proud that they, of all people, are the first to be privileged with this information.

If that was the case, they were very quickly to be disillusioned. Almost immediately Jesus goes on to say that “the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes, be killed and raised on the third day”.

This is the first time in Luke that Jesus refers to himself as “the Son of Man”. It occurs 81 times in the four gospels and is only used by Jesus of himself. In the book of Daniel (7:13-14) we see the ‘Son of Man’ pictured as a heavenly figure who is entrusted by God with authority, glory and sovereign power. Jesus’ use of the title in a Messianic sense is made clear by its close proximity to Peter’s declaration of Jesus as the ‘Christ’.

We know from Matthew and Mark that the disciples - in particular Peter - were dumbfounded when they heard Jesus’ words and wanted to reject them entirely. It was totally against all their expectations of the Messiah, apart from the fact that they could not bear to have those things happen to their Master.

To them, it simply did not make any sense. First, Jesus as Messiah was going to be rejected and handed over by the leaders of their own people. Secondly, he was going to go through a terrible and humiliating death. His “being raised” on the third day - whatever that meant - did little to alleviate their confusion.

But, as Mark indicates, this was a further step in their relationship with Jesus. They now recognised him as the Messiah but now they had to learn just what kind of Messiah he was going to be and how he was going to liberate not only his own people but people all over the world.

We, too, of course, have to keep going through the same process. We have to deepen our understanding of the true identity of Jesus and we have to be able to understand how the suffering and dying Messiah is not only the way he needed to go to reconcile us with God but that we too have to be ready to go the same way. We have to learn to see the redemptive and healing power in the pains, sufferings, disappointments and failures of our lives.

Week 25 | Saturday

Readings - Zechariah 2:5-9,14-15; Luke 9:43-45

FIRST READING (Zechariah 2:5-9,14-15)

Today, we have the first of three readings from the prophet Zechariah. The book is closely, very closely, linked with Haggai whom we have been reading over the previous two days. The introduction is dated Oct-Nov, 520 BC, only weeks away from the prophecy of Haggai.

The Book of Zechariah consists of two distinct parts: chaps. 1-8 and 9-14. The first part is concerned with Israel’s messianic future, emanating from the Temple. It begins with eight visions and today’s reading is taken from the third of these. The second part of the book (from which the other two readings will be taken) is entirely different and seems to be another work altogether, written at a later time, perhaps under the reign of Alexander the Great (who had overthrown the Persians).

Like Haggai, Zechariah was concerned with the rebuilding of the Temple but, more than Haggai, was also concerned with national restoration and the high level of moral behaviour which was linked with it. This Restoration is expected to inaugurate a messianic era in which the priesthood, represented by Joshua, will be held in increasing honour. But the sovereign power will be wielded by the ‘Branch’, a messianic title which the prophet applies to Zerubbabel. The two Anointed Ones will rule in perfect harmony. As things turn out, the two ‘Anointed Ones’ - Priest and King - will be combined in one Person, Jesus Christ.

Today’s reading presents parts of the third of eight visions the prophet has about a future glorious Jerusalem. We need to remember that these words were written when the exiles had only recently returned from exile and Jerusalem was still in a sorry state. The re-building of the Temple had not gone beyond the laying of the foundation and both Haggai and Zechariah are concerned that the rest of the re-building process get under way as soon as possible.

Today Zechariah is trying to build up the morale and confidence of the returnees.

Raising his eyes, the prophet says he has had a vision. He sees a man with a measuring line in his hand. The measuring line is for taking measurements for the new building work and is a symbol of the overall Restoration, not just of the Temple but of the people also. Zechariah asks the man where he is going. The man replies: “To measure Jerusalem, to calculate her width and length.”

And, while the first man (now described as an ‘angel’ but evidently Zechariah himself) walks away, another angel comes out. The prophet is to go and tell the young man (Zechariah): “Jerusalem is to remain unwalled, because of the great number of people and beasts within her.”

The prophet is being led to realise that the rebuilt Temple is not just for those who are living there now. What is in question is a New Jerusalem and a New Temple, whose population will overflow to such an extent that the City will be as if it had no walls.

Because, as Yahweh himself declares, he himself will be a wall of fire around her and will be the Glory within her. The messianic Jerusalem will be protected by Yahweh himself, who has returned to his rebuilt Temple. This is reminiscent of the time in the desert when Yahweh accompanied his people with a pillar of cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night. Earlier on Isaiah, too, had said: “The Lord will create over the whole site of Mount Zion and over her place of assembly, a smoking cloud by day and a light of flaming fire by night. Over all, his Glory will be shelter and protection” (Is 4:5-6).

Our reading then concludes with part of a hymn of exhortation to the exiles:

Sing, rejoice, daughter of Zion,
for now I am coming
to live among you,
Yahweh declares.
And on that day many nations
will be converted to Yahweh
Yes, they will become his people,
And they will live among you.

Here we have, in part, the return of the Lord among his people which will happen once the new Temple is rebuilt and dedicated. But there is also a looking forward to a greater Jerusalem, to be inaugurated by the coming of God’s Son to live among us with a totally new Presence, sealed in a New Covenant. It will certainly be a city without walls to which all the nations of the world will be invited to come and stay.

We, the baptised and members of Christ’s Body, are among those who have been invited to come and live among God’s own people and who, by the grace of God, are now ourselves the Temple of God all over the world. As Paul said to the Corinthians: “Are you not aware that you are the Temple of God and that the Spirit of God lives in you?. . . For the Temple of God is holy and you are that Temple” (1 Cor 3:16,17). It is an awesome responsibility!

GOSPEL (Luke 9:43-45)

After yesterday’s reading where the disciples recognised their Master as the Messiah and are told about the death and resurrection of Jesus, there follows the scene with the three chosen apostles on the mountain where they get a glimpse of Jesus in glory (the transfiguration). This is followed by the healing of the epileptic boy.

The reaction of the crowds to this cure was that “they were all amazed at the mighty power of God”. Not, we might note, the mighty power of Jesus. Even the crowds could recognise the real source of what Jesus was doing.

It is at this high point of Jesus’ popularity that he says just to his disciples, “Let all this sink into your ears, for the Son of man will be handed over into the hands of men.” What Jesus seems to be saying is that they are to realise there is no contradiction whatever between Jesus revealing in himself the unlimited power of God and his being handed over powerless to the power of his enemies. Only when they can see and understand the meaning of a suffering Messiah will they fully know the Way of Jesus.

But, Luke tells us, they were not ready yet for this.”They did not understand what Jesus was saying. It was hidden from them and they could not see it.” At the same time they were afraid to ask him.

To what extent can we say that we understand and accept the idea of a suffering Messiah? We are used to looking at the cross of Jesus but to what degree do we see the place of suffering in our own lives? Can we see that, without pain and suffering in our own lives and in those of others, our lives would be in many ways impoverished? Strange as it may seem, it is pain and suffering that can bring out what is most deeply human in all of us.

Week 26 | Monday

FIRST READING (Zechariah 8:1-8)

Our two remaining readings from Zechariah come from the second part of the book which, as was mentioned, is quite different from the first part and seems to come from a different source and a different time. What it has in common with the first part is the vision of a new and restored Jerusalem with a great future.

The author has a vision of Jerusalem restored to being once again a peaceful and welcoming environment, even more than it had been before the exile.

The whole 8th chapter is a collection of short independent oracles, with the exception of 8:16-17, which is an instruction. They all deal with the messianic age, described as an age of simple happiness and of peace under the blessing of Yahweh, present in Zion (Jerusalem). There are 10 promises of blessing, each beginning with “Yahweh Sabaoth says this.” (vv. 2,3,4,6,7,9,14,18,20,23), some of which are in our reading.

We begin with the first blessing:

“I am burning with jealousy for Zion,
with furious jealousy for her sake,” says Yahweh.

The Lord’s love for his people is often described as a ‘jealous’ love, indicating, in human terms, that Yahweh does not want to have any rivals. His people’s service has to be given totally to him and to no other ‘god’. When giving the Ten Commandments Yahweh had told his people: “For I, the Lord, your God, am a jealous God” (Exod 20:5)

“I am coming back to Zion and shall dwell in the heart of Jerusalem”, that is, in its Temple. Then Jerusalem will be called the Faithful City and the mountain of Yahweh Sabaoth called the Holy Mountain. The ‘mountain’ is Mount Zion on which Jerusalem and the Temple are built.

“Aged men and women once again will sit
in the squares of Jerusalem
each with a stick to lean on
because of their great age
and the squares of the city will be full
of boys and girls playing there.”

The image is one of absolute peace and security even for the most vulnerable in society - the elderly and the children. Similar predictions of complete peace and harmony can be found in Isaiah (11:6-9 and 65:20-25).

“If this seems an impossible miracle
to the Remnant of this people (in those days),
will it seem one to me? declares Yahweh.”

Right now, where there is still a measure of social turmoil as the people try to settle down after the exile and get about rebuilding a stable society, such dreams seem far in the future. But to the Lord all things are possible.

“Look, I shall rescue my people
from the countries of the east
and from the countries of the west.”

Literally “from the land of the sunrise and from the land of the going in of the sun” i. e. from everywhere - wherever God’s people are (cf. Ps 50:1; 113:3; Mal 1:11). The Lord will deliver his people, scattered in so many places. He will bring them back from exile, bondage and dispersion.”The Lord shall take it in hand to reclaim the remnant of his people that is left from Assyria and Egypt, Patros, Ethiopia, and Elam, Shinar, Hamath, and the isles of the sea” (Isaiah 11:11). This Jewish dream is still very much alive.

“I shall bring them back
to live in the heart of Jerusalem,
and they will be my people
and I shall be their God,
faithful and just.”

Yahweh will bring back not just the exiles from Babylon only, but the Jews scattered throughout the world. Their return will be followed by a renewal of the covenant - “They will be my people and I shall be their God”. This speaks of an intimate fellowship in a covenant relationship, constantly repeated through both the Old and New Testaments. It involves a mutual and intimate commitment to each other. People have expectations of their God but he, too, has expectations of them. And the Restoration of Judah to the age-old covenant blessing is guaranteed by Yahweh’s fidelity and justice.

For us, we see the return on a much wider basis. It is the return of people from all over the world to a New Jerusalem, built around Jesus Christ as Messiah, King, Saviour and Lord. Those who gather in the New Jerusalem come not from one ethnic group but from all over the world in a community where there is no distinction made regarding Jew or Gentile, male or female, free person or slave, where all are united in total equality and status as children of God and brothers and sisters of Jesus Christ.

This coming together is reflected in the Third Eucharistic Prayer of our Catholic Liturgy:

“All life, all holiness comes from you
through your Son, Jesus Christ our Lord,
by the working of the Holy Spirit.
From age to age you gather a people to yourself,
so that from from the rising of the sun to its setting
a perfect offering may be made to the glory of your name.”

GOSPEL (Luke 9:46-50)

Following on Jesus once again telling his disciples that he was going to be “handed over” to suffering and death, we were told in our previous reading that they did not understand what he meant. It did not make sense to them.

Now, almost as an indication of how far they were from Jesus’ thinking, they began arguing among themselves which one among them should be seen as the greatest. Why should they be arguing about this? Was it because, whatever difficulties they had in accepting what Jesus had said about his future, they were wondering what was going to happen after Jesus had been taken away from them? If they were to remain together as a group, which of them would be in charge?

Perhaps Peter was already beginning to think that he should be the one. Perhaps some of the others felt it should be one of them.

But Jesus, who, of course, was not present during these sensitive discussions, was well aware of what was going on. He took a child and put it in their midst.”Whoever receives a child like this in my name, receives me. And whoever receives me, receives him who sent me. For the one that is least among you all is the greatest.”

It is interesting that the greatness is to be seen in the child rather than in the one who receives it. The child represents all who are vulnerable and weak and powerless. To “receive” such persons is to treat them with the utmost dignity and respect and to accept them and lift them up.

In Jesus’ eyes, such little people are truly great because, to those who have eyes to see, they are the ones in whom we can especially meet Jesus and love and serve him. St Francis of Assisi, who kissed the leper (a particularly daring thing to do in his time), or Mother Teresa, tenderly picking up a decaying, barely living body off the street knew this well. To find Jesus in such a person is to make direct contact with God himself.

Jesus himself will reach the peak of his own greatness when he hangs dying and helpless on the cross. This is the lesson the disciples will learn to see and accept in time. We have to keep working on it too because it does not come easily to any of us.

The second part of today’s gospel points to another area where the disciples have to change their outlook. John, the brother of James, who both come across in the Synoptics as somewhat hotheaded (they had the nickname “sons of thunder”), tells Jesus they saw someone driving out devils in Jesus’ name. They had told the man to stop because he was “not one of us”. (Was there an element of jealousy also? In Mark 9:14ff, we are told that the disciples failed to drive out an evil spirit from a boy.)

Here we have something of the arrogance of the insider, of the elitist. John and his companions felt that the exorcism of evil spirits in the name of Jesus was something only they were allowed to do. Jesus did not agree.”Leave him alone,” he told them. And he enunciates a principle for them to follow: “Whoever is not against us is for us.”

It is a constant temptation among more devout religious people to set themselves apart from “the others”. It can happen to bishops or priests or religious. It can happen in a parish to members of the parish council or some parish group - a prayer group, charismatics, the liturgy committee or whatever.

We can find ourselves developing a two-tier community of “us” and “them”. We can find ourselves looking down on those who come in late for Mass and hang around the back door or who only come occasionally or maybe even only turn up at Christmas.

Even more, we can be tempted to set ourselves apart from non-Catholic and non-Christian groups. We can fail to see God working in all kinds of people, religious and non-religious, atheists, agnostics and people who apparently do not believe in anything.

Of course, as Christians, we do have a distinctive understanding of life and its meaning coming from the teaching and life of Jesus and it should not be compromised. But, at the same time, we do not have a monopoly of the truth. No one has. The full Truth is beyond all of us. We are all searching. Still less do we have a monopoly on good works. God can and does use any person to build the Kingdom. And it is our responsibility to work hand in hand with such people. Ultimately, our aim is not to promote our Church but God’s work and God’s plan for the whole world.

Week 26 | Tuesday

FIRST READING (Zechariah 8:20-23)

The last of our three selected readings from Zechariah. It is also the final section of the first part of the book and is another looking forward to a time of messianic salvation.

There are more words of encouragement from Zechariah for the Jews who have returned from exile and who are still trying to re-establish their homes in Jerusalem. Things do not look too good right now but Yahweh promises that the time is soon coming when people from even Gentile cities all over will come flocking to Jerusalem, drawn there as if by some magnetic power.

“In the future, peoples and citizens of many and strong cities will come; and citizens of one city will approach those of another and say, ‘Come! Let us go to implore the favour of the Lord!’. Yes, many peoples and great nations will seek out Yahweh Sabaoth in Jerusalem and entreat Yahweh’s favour.” This prediction anticipates fulfilment of the promise of Gentile blessing in Yahweh’s covenant with Abraham: “All the communities of the earth shall find blessing in you” (Gen 12:3)

Isaiah also has Yahweh say: “My house [Temple in Jerusalem] shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples” (Is 56:7), a saying quoted in Mark’s gospel when Jesus drove the money-changers from the Temple, Mark 11:17)

“Yahweh Sabaoth says this, ‘In those days, ten men from nations of every language will take a Jew by the sleeve and say: We want to go with you, since we have learnt that God is with you’.” True godliness in a person will attract others to the Lord. ‘Ten’ indicates a large or complete number in the Hebrew.

Incidentally, the word ‘Jew’ for the people of the kingdom of Judah after the exile first appears in Jeremiah. Most of the Old Testament speaks of ‘Hebrews’ and ‘Israelites’.

We, as Christians, belong now to what we call the “new Jerusalem”, the People of God. Are people flocking to be part of our “city”? Are they saying, “We will go with you, for we have heard that God is with you”? Is that what they see in us - people truly infused with the spirit of God and Jesus Christ? Are we the salt of the earth, leading people to praise God because of what they see in us?

Certainly, there are people every year who are applying to join our communities, people who are received through Baptism every Easter. There are also, alas, those who are leaving our “city” and not coming back. Is it that they no longer can see that God is with us? If that is the case, what changes are needed in our way of living the Gospel?

GOSPEL (Luke 9:51-56)

We come today to a distinct turning point in Luke’s gospel. It is marked by the opening words of today’s passage: “When the days for his being taken up were fulfilled, he resolutely determined to journey to Jerusalem.” The ‘taking up’ or the ‘assumption’ of Jesus refers to his passion and death leading to resurrection and ascension. It corresponds to the ‘glory’ that John speaks of and for whom the crucifixion is a ‘lifting up’ into ‘glory’.

At this point we have now come to the end of Jesus’ ministry in Galilee and we move on to a new section - the journey to Jerusalem which ends at chap. 18:27 where we find Jesus in Jerusalem. The opening corresponds to Mark 10:1 where Jesus is seen entering Judea to preach there and which John more specifically describes as a journey to Jerusalem during the time of the Feast of Tabernacles (John 7:1-10)

But Luke diverges from Mark’s story with very different material. He now follows Matthew’s source as well as using material of his own. The section consists almost entirely of teachings of Jesus to his disciples. It is all loosely organised within the framework of Jesus making his way to Jerusalem. The section we are entering is a time of preparation for the disciples for their future role as Messengers of the Kingdom.

Jerusalem is the place where it is all going to happen - the ‘exodus’ of Jesus, including his suffering, death, resurrection, and ascension leading to the passing on of his mission to his disciples with the coming down of the Spirit of the Father and Jesus on the disciples. And it will be from Jerusalem that the new Church will be established and from Jerusalem it will spread gradually throughout the whole Mediterranean area until it reaches the empire’s capital in Rome and from there to the ends of the earth.

As he set out, Jesus sent some messengers ahead to announce his coming. In order to go directly from Galilee to Judea, where the city of Jerusalem was situated, they would have had to pass through Samaria. Samaritans were particularly hostile to Jews, especially when they were on their way to a Jewish festival in Jerusalem (as Jesus and his disciples seemed to be doing). It would take at least three days to cross Samaria and the Samaritans were refusing the disciples overnight shelter. Because of this situation, Jewish pilgrims and travellers often avoided confrontation by going down the east bank of the Jordan River. There is an irony here that, when the first Christians were persecuted in Jerusalem, they took refuge in Samaria which became one of the first places to accept the Gospel. (Very likely, the evangelist is aware of the irony when telling this story.)

Faced with this hostility, the brothers James and John, whom we described yesterday as hotheads, suggested that fire from heaven be called down to burn them up. Their threat is reminiscent of the fire that Elijah brought down on the emissaries of an idolatrous king. They were indignant that their Master, the Messiah, should be treated in this way. There is a parallel here between Jesus’ negative reception in his home town of Galilee with his rejection by the people of Samaria.

But Jesus distances himself from those disciples and gives them a scolding. This was not Jesus’ way. Instead, they went off to another village where they hoped to find a better welcome. As we see in other parts of the Gospel, Jesus does not normally go out of his way to court trouble. On the other hand, he will not hesitate to speak his mind or do what he believes is right, even if certain kinds of people take offence at it.

It is never Jesus’ way to destroy his enemies. We will see that clearly after he reaches Jerusalem where far worse things are done to him. Jesus’ purpose always is to change people who are against him, to defuse their hostility and help them to see things in a better way. It is something we could try to do more often. It is not at all the “softy’s” approach. On the contrary, it requires great inner strength and security.

Week 26 | Wednesday

FIRST READING (Nehemiah 2:1-8)

Today we begin some readings from the Book of Nehemiah. This is a historical, not a prophetic, book like Haggai and Zechariah. Nehemiah is paired with Ezra and all these books come from the same period. The Remnant of God’s People has returned from exile in Babylon and is trying to re-establish Jerusalem spiritually, socially and materially.

Speaking specifically of Nehemiah, the Jerusalem Bible in its introduction says:

Nehemiah, though inspired by the same ideals [as Ezra], acts in a different sphere, restoring and repopulating Jerusalem, and making it possible and attractive for its citizens to lead a national life. The record he has left us, more intimate than that of Ezra, reveals a vivid and human personality, ungrudging of effort yet prudent and deliberate, trusting in God, whose help he seeks in frequent prayer. Behind him he left a noble memory, and Ben Sirach sings the praises of him who ‘rebuilt our walls which lay in ruins’ (Sir 49:13).

Nehemiah, as he tells us, was a Jew and a cup bearer for the king of Persia. The passage also reveals a man of great gentleness and courtesy and a deeply spiritual person. No wonder the king appreciated his services.

It might help to understand today’s reading to give a brief summary of what leads up to it. While Nehamiah was in the Persian city of Susa a fellow-Jew came to him and described the plight of the Jews who had managed to return to Jerusalem. He was told they were in a very bad and demoralised condition. The walls of the city were in ruins and the gates had been burned down.

On hearing this, Nehemiah broke down and wept. He mourned, fasted and prayed to his God on behalf of his people. He admits to God that they have behaved very badly and have failed miserably in observing the Law they had received through Moses. He then reminds God of his promise: if the people misbehave, they will be scattered everywhere but, if they return to God and keep his commandments, he will bring them back from even the remotest parts.

The reading opens in the month of Nisan, in the 20th year of King Artaxerxes, that is, March-April 445 BC. The time is a little later, though belonging to the same historical period, than that of Ezra, Haggai and Zechariah, whose books we have just been reading.

As the king’s cup bearer, Nehemiah has the right to bring wine to the king. It is four months since he was first told of the plight of his people. The delay in approaching the king has been variously explained: the king may have been in his winter palace in Babylon; he may not have been in the right mood; even though Nehemiah was clearly a court favourite, diplomacy made him bide his time in making his approach.

As he brought the wine to the king, the king commented that he had never seen Nehemiah so depressed before. No matter what one’s personal problems were, king’s servants would be expected to keep their feelings to themselves and to display a cheerful disposition in the royal presence. The king shrewdly guesses the source of the problem. As Nehemiah is clearly in good health, his sadness must come from the heart.

Nehemiah is alarmed that his inner feelings are so obvious but then boldly tells the king the reason for his depression.”May the king live forever! How can I not look depressed when the city where the tombs of my ancestors are lies in ruins and its gates have been burnt down?” Nehemiah does not mention Jerusalem by name. He may have wished to arouse the king’s sympathy by stressing first the desecration of ancestral tombs, something the king, from his own culture, could sympathise with.

When the king asks him what Nehemiah wants him to do, Nehemiah first makes a short, spontaneous prayer to his God. One of Nehemiah’s striking characteristics in this book is his frequent recourse to prayer. He then makes his bold request: “If the king approves and your servant enjoys your favour, send me to Judah, to the city of the tombs of my ancestors, so that I can rebuild it.” Again he does not mention Jerusalem by name but emphasises that the city is where his ancestors are buried.

The king - with the queen sitting beside him - asks, “How long will your journey take, and when will you come back?” The mention of the queen here is probably significant. The king is clearly fond of Nehemiah; perhaps the queen even more so. And Nehemiah may have timed his approach when he knew the queen would also be present.

Ctesias, a Greek who lived at the Persian court, informs us that the name of Artaxerxes’ queen was Damaspia and that the king had at least three concubines. Like Esther, Damaspia may have used her influence with the king (cf. Esther 5). The Persian court was notorious for the great influence exercised by the royal women. Especially domineering was Amestris, the cruel wife of Xerxes and mother of Artarxerxes I.

As soon as Nehemiah has indicated how long his mission would take, the king gives his immediate approval. Nehemiah probably asked for a brief leave of absence, which he then had extended. We can infer from 5:14 that he spent 12 years on his first term as governor of Judah. In the 32nd year of Artaxerxes, Nehemiah returned to report to the king and then came back to Judah for a second term (13:6-7).

Next, Nehemiah asks for guarantees of protection from various officials with whom he will have to deal on the way to his mission.”If the king approves, may I be given letters of authorisation for the governors of Transeuphrates to let me pass through on my way to Judah?”

A contemporary document from Arsames, the satrap of Egypt who was at the Persian court, to one of his officers who was returning to Egypt orders Persian officials to provide him with food and drink on the stages of his journey. ‘Transeuphrates’ literally means ‘on the other i. e. western side of the River Euphrates’. From the Palestinian point of view the land “beyond the river” was Mesopotamia. From the Mesopotamian point of view the land “beyond the River” included the areas of Aram, Phoenicia and Palestine. The Persians also called this area Athura.

Nehemiah also requests that an order be given to the keeper of the king’s forest to supply him with timber for the beams of the gates of the citadel, the city walls, and for the house which Nehemiah will need for his residence.

The Hebrew for ‘king’s forest’ is pardes, a loanword from Old Persian meaning ‘enclosure’, a pleasant retreat or park. The word occurs elsewhere in the Old Testament only in Eccl 2:5 (“parks”) and the Song of Songs 4:13 (“orchard”). In the Septuagint the Greek transliteration paradeisos (ï°ï¡ï²ï¡ï¤ï¥ï©ï³ï¯ï³) is used here. In the period between the Old and New Testaments, the word acquired the sense of the abode of the blessed dead, i. e.”paradise”. It appears three times in the New Testament (Luke 23:43; 2 Cor 12:4; Rev. 2:7).

As to the location of the “king’s forest”, some believe that it was in Lebanon, which was famed for its forests of cedars and other coniferous trees. But a more plausible suggestion is that it should be identified with Solomon’s gardens at Etham, about 10 km south of Jerusalem (see Josephus, Antiquities, 8. 7. 3). For the city gates, costly imported cedars from Lebanon would not be used but rather indigenous oak, poplar or terebinth.

The “citadel” probably refers to the fortress north of the temple, the forerunner of the Antonia fortress built by Herod the Great (Josephus, Antiquities). This is probably where Jesus was arraigned before Pontius Pilate (John 18:28) and later Paul would be held there (Acts 22:24).

All these requests were granted and Nehemiah attributed this to the kindly hand of God watching over him.

The reading again indicates the benevolent attitude of the “pagan” kings of Persia towards God’s people. As Christians, we know that many of the works we are involved in could not continue without the help of many non-Christian people who share generously of themselves and their goods.

Let us today thank God for these people and ask him to bless them.

It will also help us to understand that God’s truth and goodness can be found anywhere. It is important for us to be able to recognise it wherever we see it. Jesus’ words that “the Kingdom of God is near” has many meanings. For those with eyes to see, God’s Kingdom can be discerned everywhere.

We might also imitate Nehamiah in his seeing the hand of God in everything he experiences and, before all our decisions, lay them before God first in prayer.

GOSPEL (Luke 9:57-62)

Today’s passage has to be seen in the light of yesterday’s. Jesus has reached an important stage in his public life and mission. He is now irrevocably on his way to Jerusalem and all that that means for him - and us.

But he does not want to go alone. His whole purpose is to have people go with him. Already there are his disciples but there will be more. Today we see three “candidates” coming forward with a lot of good will but Jesus makes them aware of what following him really means. Their responses to Jesus’ remarks are not given so we do not know whether they became followers or not. The point Luke is making is to show what following entails.

a, The first says very generously that he will go wherever Jesus is going. Jesus answers: “Foxes have their lairs and the birds of the air their nests but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head.”

These words of Jesus indicate not poverty or indigence but freedom. To follow Jesus fully one needs to be free, not to be tied down by anything and not to be anxious about having or not having things.

There is no evidence that Jesus was poor in the sense of being deprived of the necessities of life. He did not own a house but it is never even hinted that he had to sleep out in the open air. He belonged to a group of people who more than willingly shared what they had with him.

b, The second man was actually invited by Jesus to be a follower. But he asked first to be allowed to go and bury his father. This does not mean that his father had just died and he wanted to attend the funeral. It is more likely that he wanted, as a dutiful son, to wait for his father’s death before going off with Jesus.

But that is not good enough. The call of Jesus transcends needs of family, tradition and culture. The needs of the living outweigh those of the dead. His father might not die for years; what was the man supposed to do in the meantime?

Once we are aware of Jesus’ call the only time to answer is now. In spite of that, we should not read these lines too rigidly. Clearly, for example, there would be times when one would want to be present at the death of a parent, especially to provide support for the grieving spouse. That would be in total harmony with respect for parents and love for the neighbour. But the man in the example is in a totally different situation. He is talking about an event in the future whose time and place are not known.

c, Another would-be follower asked first for permission to go home and say goodbye to his family. It was similar to a request made by Elisha when he was called to succeed Elijah as prophet. Elijah’s answer was, “Go ahead.” So what we have here

seems a very reasonable request but it is rejected by Jesus who says, “No man, having put his hand to the plough, looking back is fit for the kingdom of God.”

Like Jesus himself turning his face towards Jerusalem and all that it means for him, once the decision has been made to serve God and his people, there can be no turning back. Again, the words of Jesus should not be taken literally.

Read in that way, they would be totally at variance with the loving and compassionate quality of Jesus’ character. The point that is being made in all three examples is the absoluteness, the unconditionality that is required in the following of Jesus. It is a theme which is emphasised more than once in Luke’s gospel. We cannot be fence-sitters, to have our cake and eat it. Being a follower of Jesus can never be a part-time affair. It is all or nothing. At the same time, the demands of agape-love are always there. It is a matter each time of discerning where the truly loving act lies.

If we are honest, a lot of us are like these men in our following of Christ and in the living out of our faith. We do have our material wants (distinct from needs), we feel we cannot live without “our little comforts in life”.

Let us pray today for a high degree of freedom in being able to accept unconditionally God’s will for us. To have that freedom is one of the greatest blessings and graces of our life.

Week 26 | Thursday

Nehemiah 8:1-4,5-6,7-12; Luke 10:1-12

FIRST READING (Nehemiah 8:1-4,5-6,7-12)

A dramatic scene where Ezra, the priest-scribe, gathers the returned exiles in Jerusalem. It is also a highly meaningful passage for Christians.

Scholars say that the chapter from which today’s reading comes should be inserted in the Book of Ezra after Ezr 8:36. The mention of Nehemiah in the passage was inserted later after the displacement of passages in Ezra-Nehemiah. There is no clear evidence that Nehemiah and Ezra were ever in Jerusalem at the same time. Although we are in the Book of Nehemiah, the passage is about Ezra. See the readings from the Book of Ezra for last week, Week 25.

We are told that it is in the 7th month, the beginning of the civil year, and the returned Israelites are now settled in their towns. But now they all gather together “as one man” in the square in front of the Water Gate. They ask Ezra, a scribe, to bring the Book of the Law of Moses which had been prescribed for them.

The Water Gate was south east of the Temple and not on sacred ground. Squares were normally situated near a city gate.

Scribes, as their name indicates, originally served kings as secretaries, such as Shaphan under Josiah, where the Hebrew word for ‘scribe’ is translated “secretary”. Other scribes took dictation - such as Baruch, who wrote down what Jeremiah spoke. We need to remember that most people, probably including even kings and highly placed administrators, could not read or write.

However, from the exilic period on, the ‘scribes’ were scholars who studied and taught the Scriptures. In the Gospel they are often referred to as “teachers of the Law” and paired with the Pharisees. Some Pharisees would certainly have been also Scribes. In the New Testament period they were addressed as “Rabbi” - a title often accorded to Jesus himself.

The “Book of the Law” that the people are asking for would be the Pentateuch (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy) as it existed at that time. Four views have been proposed concerning the extent of this Book: (1) a collection of legal materials, (2) the priestly laws of Exodus and Leviticus, (3) the laws of Deuteronomy, (4) the Pentateuch. Surely Ezra could have brought back with him the Torah, i. e. , the entire Pentateuch.

So, on the first day of the 7th month, the priest Ezra brought the law before the assembly, consisting of men, women and all those old enough to understand. The first day of the 7th month makes it October 8 in the year 445 BC. In pre-exilic times the feast of the seventh month (Sept-Oct) began the new year. It was celebrated as the Feast of Trumpets, with no work being done on that day and the holding of a sacred assembly. Normally, women did not usually take part in assemblies but were brought, together with children, on such solemn occasions.

Then, in the square in front of the Water Gate, in the presence of the men and women, and of those old enough to understand, Ezra read from the Book of the Law from dawn till noon, while all the people listened attentively. The scene is reminiscent of Moses reading the Law to the people at Mount Sinai. Apparently, the people stood for five or six hours - from dawn until noon, listening with great attention to the reading and explanation of the Scriptures.

So that he could be better seen and heard, Ezra stood on a wooden dais erected for the purpose. Around him stood a number of prominent citizens. As he opened the book to read, all the people rose to their feet. (It would, of course, have been a scroll and not a ‘book’ as we understand the word.) The rabbis deduced from this verse that a congregation should stand for the reading of the Torah. It is customary in Eastern Orthodox churches for the congregation to stand throughout the service and the Vatican II liturgy also recommends standing for most of the liturgy, except when listening to the Word of God (and even then one stands for the reading of the Gospel).

At the end of the reading Ezra uttered a word of blessing for Yahweh, the great God, whose word they had just heard. And the people gave their total endorsement by raising their arms and shouting “Amen! Amen!” They then bowed down and prostrated themselves, face to the ground, before Yahweh. The repetition of ‘Amen’ conveys the intensity of feeling behind the affirmation. In our Catholic liturgy we have a ‘Great Amen’ at the end of the Eucharistic Prayer. In practice, it very often is hardly more than a pathetic murmur.

Private acts of worship often involved prostration “to the ground”, as in the case of Abraham’s servant, Moses before the Lord at Sinai (Exod 34:8), Joshua before an angel of the Lord (Jos 5:14) and Job at the news that his whole family and herds have been wiped out (Job 1:20). In 2 Chron 20:18 Jehoshaphat and the people “fell down in worship before the Lord” when they heard his promise of victory.

With the reading and exposition of the Law complete, a number of Levites explained the Law to the people, while the people all remained in their places. And Ezra continued reading from the book of the Law of God, translating and giving the sense; so the reading was not just heard but understood.

Rabbinic tradition understands the Hebrew for this expression (‘giving the sense”) as referring to translation from Hebrew into an Aramaic Targum. But there is no evidence of Targums (free Aramaic translations of Old Testament books or passages) at this early date. The earliest extensive Targum is one on Job from Qumran, dated c. 150-100 BC. Targums exist for every book of the Old Testament except for Daniel and Ezra-Nehemiah.

The effect of this reading on the people was great.”Then his excellency Nehemiah and the priest-scribe Ezra and the Levites who were instructing the people said to all the people, ‘Today is sacred to Yahweh your God. Do not be mournful. Do not weep’. For the people were all in tears as they listened to the words of the Law.” As mentioned already, Nehemiah’s name seems to be an addition which does not belong to the original text.

On the contrary, they are told to go and celebrate with a banquet, while not forgetting those who do not have access to food.”You may go; eat what is rich, drink what is sweet and send a helping to the man who has nothing prepared.” It is not a time to be sad and mournful, “for today is sacred to our Lord. Do not be sad: the joy of Yahweh is your stronghold.”

They are to enjoy delicious festive food, prepared with much fat. Normally, the fat of sacrificial animals was offered to God as the tastiest element of various sacrifices such as burnt offerings, fellowship offerings, sin offerings and guilt offerings. On such occasions, the fat of the animal was not to be eaten.

It was also customary for God’s people to remember the less fortunate on joyous occasions. Paul has strong words for Christians who celebrate without remembering the more needy: “When you assemble it is not to eat the Lord’s Supper, for everyone is in haste to eat his own supper. One person goes hungry, while another gets drunk” (1 Cor 11:20-21). What kind of a Eucharist is that?

The Levites also consoled the people urging them to calm down, to remember it was a sacred day and no time to be sad. Then the people did as they were advised, they “went off to eat and drink and give helpings away and enjoy themselves to the full, since they had understood the meaning of what had been proclaimed to them.” In a way, with the presentation of the Law, their return was complete.

What happens in this account has many similarities with our celebration of the Eucharist:

- We listen to the Word of God read to us and have it interpreted so as to understand it better and see how it applies to our present life situation.

- Like the people in the story, we, too, stand in reverence for the Word of the Gospel.

- We remember with shame and sadness the suffering and death that our Saviour endured to liberate us from our many sins and from never-ending death.

- But we also celebrate with joy and thanksgiving his Resurrection and share together the bread and wine which are his Body and Blood.

- Like them, too, we shout a Great Amen! of thanksgiving and welcome and acceptance.

- And, afterwards, we live out what we celebrate by sharing what we have with those in greater need than ourselves.

GOSPEL (Luke 10:1-12)

Two days ago we saw Jesus firmly setting out for Jerusalem and the accomplishment of his mission. Yesterday we saw how he responded to people who wanted to or were being invited to join his mission. During the coming days we will see Jesus preparing his actual disciples for their work.

In addition to the inner circle of the Twelve, we are told today that he appointed another 72 (12x6) and sent them two by two to the places he himself would be visiting. (Only Luke mentions this group.) That is a good description of our Christian role. We are supposed to go first to prepare the ground but then it is Jesus himself who comes to plant the seed of faith.

Jesus then goes on to give an instruction to his disciples. We, too, should be listening to his words:

a, He first points out that the harvest is great and there are very few labourers, few who are willing to do the harvesting work with Jesus.

This is a text which is often thrown at us during “vocation” campaigns. We tend to hear it as a call for more priests, brothers and nuns. It is that, of course, but when Jesus spoke there were no priests, brothers or nuns. The challenge was being thrown out to all his followers to find more people to join in the harvesting work.

We have to be careful as we listen to these words not to exclude ourselves because we are middle-aged, or married, or already have a career. The words are addressed to all of us and call for some kind of response from every one of us. It is never too late to respond to the call.

b, Second, Jesus warns his followers that it may not be easy.”I am sending you out as lambs among wolves.” In spite of the message of truth, love, compassion and justice that we bring, it does not mean that we will be received with open arms. On the contrary, we may meet with strong opposition and even persecution. Our message will be seen as threatening. It will be distorted and misunderstood.

c. The disciple is called on to travel light. Jesus himself “had nowhere to lay his head” and he only had the clothes he wore. So many of us are weighed down by the things we own. Some of us have to protect our property with the latest in security devices. In our search for prosperity and material security we have lost the more precious gift of freedom. They are not to stop to greet people in the sense of carrying on lengthy conversations. Their mission was urgent - there are few labourers for a potentially huge harvest.

d, They are to be bearers of peace. Peace, shalom, is much more than an absence of violence. It is a deep inner harmony with oneself, with others, with one’s environment, with God.”Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God.” We could hardly bring a more precious gift to others than this inner peace. It is, in fact, the heart of our Christian message. Faith, hope and love are the keys to peace.

e, The evangeliser is, first, to stay in the first house that accepts him. He should not be going around looking for better accommodation. At the same time, he is to be provided with shelter and hospitality for “the labourer is worthy of his hire”.

This, it seems, was the way Jesus himself lived. And this was the overall ideal of the Christian community: a network of mutually supporting people sharing their resources with each other and with those in greater need than themselves.

g, Their work is primarily to heal the sick in the places they go to. ‘Healing’ should be taken in a wider sense of including body, feelings, mind and spirit. And ‘healing’ should also be seen not just as getting rid of a sickness but of making a person whole again. Bringing healing and wholeness into the lives of individuals and communities is of the essence of the Kingdom and at the heart of Jesus’ work and that of his followers. The sign of that wholeness is inner peace. Today it is no different.

And they are to say, “The kingdom of God has come near to you.” This is not just a statement they are to throw out. It is the core of Jesus’ message and an explanation of why people are experiencing healing and wholeness coming into their lives. This is the effect of the coming of the kingdom; this is what the coming of the kingdom means. God’s power is penetrating their lives, transforming them and making them whole again.

Luke mentions the kingdom of God more than 30 times; Matthew more than 50 times. Matthew’s is truly a Gospel of the Kingdom.

The term can have a number of meanings:

- the eternal kingship (basileia) of God

- the presence of the kingdom in the person of Jesus; he is the embodiment, the incarnation of the rule of God in himself, an incarnation he wishes to be found in his disciples and the communities they establish

- the future kingdom in the life that is to come.

In short, the kingdom, the rule of God is intended to be both a present reality as well as a future hope.

h, Finally, if there is any place where they are not received, they are to leave it to its own fate. Even then those people are to know that the kingdom of God is near to them also. There is always the hope that the results of their very rejection of the kingdom will lead to a deeper awareness later on. But by rejecting the messengers of God they have opened themselves to a fate worse than that of Sodom, a city utterly destroyed because of its shameful lack of hospitality to divine visitors. But those hearing the message of Jesus are even more accountable for hearing the message of the Kingdom proclaimed to them and turning their back on it.

Clearly, we cannot literally apply all of these points to our own work on behalf of the Gospel but we need to make the underlying principles and values ours too. It will require some reflection on our part both as individuals and as communities on how we should effectively share the Gospel with those around us and be the harvesters that are so badly needed.

Indeed, let us pray for vocations but let us remember that every single one of us is being called to work in the harvest field and not just some chosen souls who are totally unknown to us.

Week 26 | Friday

Baruch 1:15-22; Luke 10:13-16

FIRST READING (Baruch 1:15-22)

The Book of Baruch is one of the deutero-canonical (or ‘apochryphal’) books not found in the Hebrew [or Protestant] Bible. The Greek Bible puts it between Jeremiah and Lamentations but the Vulgate has it immediately after Lamentations, where it is found in our “Catholic” Bibles. According to its introduction, 1:1-14, it was written in Babylon by Baruch after the deportation and sent to Jerusalem to be read at liturgical gatherings.

The opening verses of this book ascribe it, or at least its first part, to Baruch, well-known as the secretary of the prophet Jeremiah. It contains five very different compositions, the first and the last in prose, the others in poetic form. The prose sections were certainly composed in Hebrew, though the earliest known form of the book is in Greek.

Today we have the first of two readings from the book. It is the beginning of what is called The Prayer of the Exiles, the exiles being those Jews who were deported to Babylon from Judah and Jerusalem by King Nebuchadnezzar in the 6th century BC.

As the passage seems to belong to a much later date, it may rather reflect the feelings of a later community who saw in their own situation a similarity with those exiles.

The author had begun his book by saying: “This is the text of the book written in Babylon by Baruch son of Neraiah, son of Mahseiah, son of Zedekiah, son of Hasadiah, son of Hilkiah, in the fifth year, on the seventh day of the month, at the time when the Chaldaeans [i. e. the Babylonians] had captured Jerusalem and burnt it down” (1:1-2). The details he gives indicate the year 582 BC, probably in the fifth month, the anniversary of the fall of Jerusalem, which was doubtless commemorated among the exiles as it was in Palestine.

The passage is a general lament for the situation of the Israelites now living in exile, far from their homeland and from Jerusalem and its Temple, the home of Yahweh.

But there is no complaint against Yahweh for their condition. Their sufferings are due to one reason and one reason only - the people’s long history of not obeying the Lord and going their own way. This began from the days the Lord brought them out of Egypt right up to the present time.

“We have not listened to the voice of the Lord our God in all the words of those prophets he sent us; but each, following the dictates of his evil heart, have taken to serving alien gods, and doing what is displeasing to the Lord our God.”

The writer compares the goodness and the integrity of God with that of his people. If they have suffered by being sent into exile, it is the result of their own sins and not the doing of the good God.

In our response to this reading we might reflect on how much of our own pain and misfortunes can be traced to our own behaviour, individually or corporately. It is so easy to blame God for our ills and use him as a scapegoat who will not strike back.

But the first step in expressing our love of God must begin with a total acknowledgment of our own sinfulness. Paradoxically it is those who are most aware of their sinfulness who are closest to God. Because an acknowledgment of sin is an awareness of a gap that needs to be closed. Those who deny their sin are the least likely to change and convert.

But when we do suffer, the question to ask our God is not Why me? but What now? How are we to turn this experience to a greater love of God and neighbour?

GOSPEL (Luke 10:13-16)

Strong words today from Jesus against towns where he had preached extensively - Chorazin, Bethsaida and especially Capernaum.

Chorazin is only mentioned twice in the Bible, here and in the parallel passage of Matt 11:21. It was near the Sea of Galilee and probably between 3 and 4 km north of Capernaum. Bethsaida, the home of some of Jesus’ disciples, was on the north-east shore of the Sea of Galilee. It had been built by Philip the Tetrarch, who called it ‘Julias’ after Julia, a daughter of the emperor Caesar Augustus. Capernaum, situated on the north shore of the lake, appears frequently in the Gospel narratives and was the centre from which Jesus did much of his missionary work. His work and preaching would have been most familiar to the people there.

Jesus says that if the Gentile cities of Tyre and Sidon had witnessed all that Jesus had said and done in those towns of Palestine they would have repented long ago, just as the pagan people of Niniveh had repented at the preaching of Jonah. Tyre and Sidon were towns on the Phoenician coast, north of Palestine (Lebanon today). Jesus was said to have visited the area just once and only very briefly so the people there did not have an opportunity to witness Jesus’ miracles or hear his preaching unlike the people in the towns mentioned above.

And Jesus goes further. Addressing his disciples he says, “He that hears you, hears me and he that despises you despises me” and the Father who sent him. In other words, to listen to the messengers of Jesus is equivalent to listening to him personally; to reject those messengers is to reject Jesus and to reject God.

And, in our own times, perhaps we should emphasise that those “messengers” are not just bishops, priests and religious. They include all those who sincerely proclaim the Gospel by their words and their lives.

It might be no harm then for each of us today to hear those warnings of Jesus addressed to ourselves. How well have we really responded to the call of Jesus in the Gospel? How open are we to hear that message coming to us from different kinds of people in our community? How committed are we to accepting, living and sharing that Gospel with others?

Might it be true to say that there are people in other parts of our world, our country, our society who, if they were given what we have been given, who heard what we hear, would respond much more generously than we have done?

There is never any room for complacency in our Christian life. Because we have been given so much so much more is expected of us. As Jesus says elsewhere we may be very surprised to see others, who never had an opportunity directly to hear the Gospel, go before us into God’s Kingdom.

Week 26 | Saturday

Baruch 4:5-12,27-29; Luke 10:17-24

FIRST READING (Baruch 4:5-12,27-29)

In this passage Jerusalem is personified as a widow, both lamenting and consoling her children in captivity. It is a message of encouragement and hope.

“Take courage, my people, memorial of Israel!” Israel was originally the name given to Jacob but later was applied to the people who were his descendants. All the Israelites were traditionally descended from the Jacob’s twelve sons, each one of them becoming the patriarch of a tribe bearing their name.

Israel had been sold to foreign nations not with the idea of their extermination but as the result of their provoking their God. They had angered their Creator “by offering sacrifices to demons”. The whole history of Israel, especially after settling in Canaan, was a long record of idolatry, following the religious practices of their pagan neighbours and indulging in all kinds of immoral behaviour.

They entirely forgot the God who had reared them and brought sorrow on Jerusalem who had nurtured them.

When Jerusalem saw God’s anger falling on her children and saw them being taken away into captivity in Babylon, she went into mourning.”God sent me great sorrow; I have seen my sons and daughters taken into captivity.” It was God’s punishment for their countless infidelities.

Jerusalem had nurtured them so carefully and now “in tears and sorrow, I watched them go away”. But it was the result of their own choices. Experiencing the terrible loneliness of a widow deserted by her own children (a terrible thing to happen in those times), she begs her neighbours not to gloat over her.”I am bereaved because of the sins of my children, who turned away from the law of God.”

In the last part of the reading, Jerusalem urges her children to call again on God’s name.”He who brought this on you will remember you.” It was by their own choice that they had strayed far from God; let them now turn back and search for him with all their might.

The same God who brought such disasters on them because of their sin, will - if they turn back - “rescue you and give you joy without end”.

We always pay the price for our sinfulness when, like the Prodigal Son, we wander off in our futile search for happiness in pleasure. The suffering that comes from sin, which is always a violation of our nature, is not God’s direct will. It is the natural outcome of words and acts which are evil, bringing hurt to ourselves and others.

But the Father is always waiting. Always ready to be reconciled. We have only to turn back and the warmest of welcomes is waiting for us.

GOSPEL (Luke 10:17-24)

We saw at the beginning of chapter 10 how Jesus had sent his 72 disciples out to all the places where he himself would visit. Today we see them returning full of joy and satisfaction.”Lord, even the demons were subject to us in your name.” They discovered that, in his name, they were able to do the same things that Jesus did.

In reply, Jesus said to them: “I saw Satan as lightning fall from heaven.” The power of evil is being reversed and this was partly the doing of his disciples working in his name. And he further reassures them: “I give you the power to tread on snakes and scorpions and over the power of the enemy: nothing at all will be able to hurt you.”

‘Snakes and scorpions’ more likely represent evil powers and so the statement is not to be taken literally and still less to be tested (as some obscure sects have tried to do with predictably tragic consequences!). It is true that for the committed disciple nothing can really hurt them. Physically, maybe, but not their real selves. Nothing, as Paul says, can separate us from the love of God, that is, the love that God extends to us at every moment of every day.

Then Jesus tells his disciples the real reason why they should be happy. It is not because they have special powers over evil spirits but “because your names are written in heaven”. In other words, their blessedness comes not from what they are able to do but because they have been chosen as the instruments for God to do his work, to make the Kingdom a reality. That is the origin of our blessedness too.

Then follows a beautiful prayer of Jesus to the Father. He thanks the Father because all that is coming into the world through Jesus is being made known not to the wise and great ones of this world but to “the little ones”, the people who, in the eyes of the majority, are of no account. No one really knows the Son except the Father. And no one really knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son reveals the Father.

And, since that day on the lake shore when Jesus called four fishermen to be his followers, he has been calling very ordinary people to know his identity, to hear his message and share his vision. And so he can say truly to them, “Blessed are the eyes which see what you see. Many prophets and kings have desired to see what you see and have not seen them, to hear what you have heard and not heard them.”

All of this applies to so many of us, too. We, for reasons only known to God himself, have been given knowledge of the Son. We too, by means of the Church, have been given a vision denied to so many, have heard the Word which is the Way to truth and life.

Whatever problems we may be facing right now, let us on this day count our blessings and express our gratitude for them. And the only way to do that is to say ‘Yes’ to Jesus and his Gospel. Let us start doing that right now.

Week 27 | Monday

Jonah 1:1-2:1,11; Luke 10:25-37

FIRST READING (Jonah 1:1-2:1,11)

The book of Jonah is one of the most delightful in the whole of Bible. It is probably the only book where the author wrote with his tongue firmly in his cheek. While there are marvellous things in the Bible, humour is generally not one of its characteristics. * There is a lot of humour, of the biting kind, in this book. And, what is even more rare, the laugh is mainly on the chief character.

Although it is written in a narrative style, it is not history. It is a didactic story with a moral and a very important moral. The fact that it is a book which can provoke laughter does not mean that its message is to be taken lightly. In fact, it is one of the most radical of Old Testament writings and has been described as being on the threshold of the Gospel. We will see why as we read on.

Today’s reading sets the stage for the unfolding of the story.

As the story opens, the word of Yahweh is addressed to a man called Jonah, son of Amittai. There is mention, in fact, of a prophet Jonah in the Second Book of the Kings, who lived at the time of Jeroboam II (786-746 BC). This story which was written some 300 years after that time is not about him but just uses his name.

As a prophet, Jonah is told to go to the great city of Nineveh and warn them that God is displeased with their great wickedness. According to Genesis, Nineveh was first built by Nimrod (perhaps along with Rehoboth Ir, Calah and Resen) and was traditionally known as the “great city”. About 700 BC Sennacherib made it the capital of Assyria, which it remained until its fall in 612. It was long destroyed by the time this book was written. It would have been about 800 km from Gath Hepher, Jonah’s hometown, a long way for the prophet to travel.

Except for violent behaviour mentioned later on in the story, the “evil ways” of Nineveh are not described. The prophet Nahum later states that Nineveh’s sins included plotting evil against the Lord, cruelty and plundering in war, prostitution and witchcraft and commercial exploitation. In any case, Jonah, as a pious Hebrew, would take rampant immorality and its rejection by Yahweh as a given in such a great pagan city.

Not only was its immorality to be taken for granted, as far as Jonah is concerned, its people should be left to the fate of all wicked unbelievers. Jonah is appalled at the idea of trying to convert them and does not want to go there. It seems he has no intention of having anything to do with such wicked pagans. They deserve all that God can throw against them.

So Jonah sets off westward in the opposite direction and boards a ship at Jaffa bound for Tarshish to get as far away as possible from both Nineveh and Yahweh - quite a futile thing to do. As Psalm 139 puts it: “Where can I go from your spirit? From your presence where can I flee?. . . If I take the wings of the dawn, if I settle at the farthest limits of the sea, even there your hand will guide me and your right hand hold me fast” (Ps 139:7,9-10). Jonah will soon find how true these words are.

For the Jews ‘Tarshish’ represented the end of the world. The word may be a corruption of Tartessus, a Phoenician mining colony near Gibraltar in southern Spain. Perhaps the modern equivalent would be Timbuctoo!

The ship has hardly got under way than Yahweh hurls a mighty wind and such a great storm blows up that the ship is in danger of breaking up. This is just one of several interventions by Yahweh in the story. Jonah’s disobedience has not only put his own life in danger but is threatening the lives of a totally innocent crew.

In an effort to save their lives, the sailors throw the cargo overboard to lighten the ship and then each one prays to his own god - perhaps one of them will bring the help they need. One person, however, is not doing any praying. Jonah is below decks fast asleep. He is not only indifferent to his own fate but also that of his shipmates. Maybe he thinks ‘his’ Yahweh will take care of his prophet, even a disobedient prophet.

However, these pagans are shown to be somewhat more religious than Jonah gives them credit for. Certainly his behaviour is in stark contrast to the captain who is using every possible method, including prayer to every known god, to save those on board. And he wakes up Jonah and urges him to call on his god, who might be able to do what the other gods do not seem to be able to do. The “pagan” captain’s concern for the welfare of everyone on board contrasts with the “believing”(?) prophet’s refusal to bring God’s mercy and compassion to the people of Nineveh.

As a last resort, the sailors come to the - correct - conclusion that there is someone on board who is bringing them all this misfortune. They cast lots to find out who it is and - surprise, surprise! - the lot falls on Jonah. In the context of the story, this is no chance accident.

The casting of lots was a custom widely practiced in the ancient Near East. The precise method is unclear, though it appears that, for the most part, sticks or marked pebbles were drawn from a receptacle into which they had been “thrown”. (Something similar is still seen in Chinese temples today.)

Immediately, the sailors begin to interrogate Jonah to find out where he comes from. He replies, “I am a Hebrew, and I worship Yahweh, God of Heaven, who made both sea and dry land.” The sailors would have understood Jonah’s words as being descriptive of the highest divinity. Their present experiences confirm this truth, since, in the religions of the ancient Near East generally, the supreme god was master of the seas.

This is Jonah’s first confessional statement, and, like those that follow, it is thoroughly orthodox. Though orthodox in his beliefs, Jonah refuses to fulfil his divine mission to Nineveh. It is important for us, too, to realise that theological orthodoxy is not enough to fulfil the most important requirements of Christian discipleship. The Pharisees were impeccably orthodox, too.

The sailors are terrified at Jonah’s self-revelation. They now know the cause of their peril. A believer in the god who controls the seas has disobeyed his god and made him angry. And they are all the victims of his disobedience.”Why ever did you do this?” is a rhetorical question that needs no answer. Then, as the sea gets rougher and rougher, they then ask Jonah what they are to do with him in order to restore calm in the sea. It seems as if they are looking for a way to save their lives but without doing harm to Jonah. Once again, the pagan’s care for the Hebrew far surpasses the Hebrew’s care for them. This is all part of the central lesson of the story.

At last, Jonah begins to accept responsibility for the situation.”Take me and throw me into the sea, and then it will calm down for you. I know it is my fault that this great storm has struck you.” At the same time, Jonah’s readiness to die to save the terrified sailors contrasts with his later behaviour when he leaves Nineveh expecting to watch its destruction by Yahweh at a safe distance. Which, of course, to his great chagrin and disappointment does not happen.

Even now, the sailors are still reluctant to do what Jonah suggests, even to save their own lives. Instead, they tried to row hard in order to reach the shore. (It probably was not very far away; ships in those days tended to stay close to the shore rather than risk being caught in the open sea.) The Hebrew uses the picturesque word meaning “to dig” (with the oars) to indicate their strenuous efforts. Again, the reluctance of the sailors to throw Jonah into the sea stands in sharp contrast to Jonah’s reluctance to bring God’s warning to Nineveh of impending judgment.

Finally, and still with great misgivings, the sailors make their prayer to Jonah’s god Yahweh, asking him not to hold them responsible for the death of an innocent man’s life.”For you, Yahweh, have acted as you saw fit.” They then toss Jonah into the raging sea which immediately becomes calm. They have done the right thing. At the same time, the sudden calm fills them with great fear.

Jonah’s God is truly Master of the seas and they offer him a sacrifice and make vows. They know that only the most powerful of gods can control the seas and the wind. (We remember the reaction of the disciples after Jesus had calmed the storm on the lake: “Who is this, that the winds and seas obey him?”).

They are both shocked and afraid that Jonah can be so disobedient to his God and they try to make up for his terrible behaviour. The author also emphasises the piety of the pagan sailors. They are scandalised that Jonah should disobey Yahweh, and are themselves afraid to offend Yahweh by sacrificing Jonah, and then offer worship to Jonah’s God whose power they recognise.

And such is the providence of God. He turns even the disobedience of Jonah into a grace for those sailors, a grace they would not have experienced had Jonah gone to Nineveh in the first place. More of God’s straight writing with crooked lines.

Of course, there is no evidence that the sailors renounced all their other gods as a result of this experience. Ancient pagans were ready to recognise the existence and power of many gods. At the least, however, the sailors acknowledge that the God of Israel is in control of the present events, that he is the one who both stirred up and calmed the storm, and that at this moment he is the one to be recognised and worshipped.

Once again Yahweh intervenes and arranges that a big fish should swallow Jonah, who remained in the belly of the fish for three days and three nights. The “big fish” is not likely to have been a whale, which is not found in the Mediterranean. It is not to be confused either with “Leviathan”, the sinister “serpent” of the sea (Amos 9:3) or the “monster of the deep” (Job 7:12 and other texts).

‘Three days and three nights’ may, as in the burial of Jesus (Friday evening to Sunday morning), refer to a period of time including one full day and parts of two others. In any case, the New Testament clearly uses Jonah’s experience as a foreshadowing of the burial and resurrection of Jesus, who was buried in the earth for “three days and three nights” (e. g. Matt 12:40)

While inside the fish, Jonah made a long prayer of distress and appeal to Yahweh, which is not included in our readings. And, on the third day, again at the command of Yahweh, the fish vomits Jonah on to dry land.

He is back where he started. And, not surprisingly, this gives Jonah some time to reflect on his situation. When the next call comes, he will respond differently - up to a point.

*Interesting, since the Jews are famous for their wit and humour, especially against themselves.

GOSPEL (Luke 10:25-37)

As we accompany Jesus firmly on his way to Jerusalem we come across this beautiful incident which is only to be found in Luke. (Imagine our loss if this gospel had not been handed down to us. And what other treasures of Jesus have we in fact lost over the centuries?)

We are told that a scribe approached Jesus with the intention of putting him on the defensive and perhaps making him contradict the teaching of the Law. (Was this just a single attack or was it part of a conspiracy?) The question sounded simple, the kind that anyone would put to a religious teacher: “What must I do to inherit eternal life?” As so often happens, Jesus throws the question back at his interrogator. In fact, as a scribe, the man should already know the answer and Jesus asks him his opinion.

He replies as a Scribe might be expected to, not in his own words, but quoting two passages from the Pentateuch, from the books of Deuteronomy and Leviticus which say we are to love God with all our heart and soul and our neighbour as ourselves.”Well done,” says Jesus.”Do that and life is yours.”

However, the man is not satisfied.”Anxious to justify himself”, he asks for the meaning of the word “neighbour”. For him the word meant, of course, only other Jews like himself but did it include every Jew, even those who did not follow the Law? Was he supposed to love them also?

The answer Jesus gave must have come as a surprise, not to say a shock. And it came in the form of a kind of parable. It is the story we know as the Good Samaritan. In the eyes of most Jews of the time such a term would be a contradiction. It would be like speaking in not so distant days of a “good Communist” or in more recent times of a “good terrorist”.

It is most likely (for the story to have meaning) that the man who was set upon by robbers and left half dead on his way from Jerusalem to Jericho was a Jew. The road from Jerusalem to Jericho was a distance of about 30 km and involved a drop from about 800 metres above sea level to about 150 metres below sea level. It ran through rocky and desert country providing ample opportunity for hidden robbers to waylay unwitting travellers.

In the story three people saw him there. Two of them were religious people, people expected to be lovers of God and neighbour. Yet both carefully passed by on the other side. It is most likely that they were going in the opposite direction, that is, they were on their way from Jericho to Jerusalem and the Temple. The injured man would have been covered in blood. No one intending to go to pray in the Temple would dare to contaminate oneself and become ritually unclean by coming in contact with blood. In other words, they ignored the man for religious reasons.

But then a Samaritan came by. He was, in the eyes of the Jews, an alien and a heretic. There was strong hostility between the two neighbouring peoples on historical, geographical, racial and religious grounds. The Samaritan was regarded as a half-breed both physically and spiritually. They were ethnically related and shared some of the Jewish beliefs but were seen as heretics, ‘half-Jews’. We remember how surprised the Samaritan woman by the well of Jacob was when she was spoken to by Jesus, who would have been expected to ignore her.

This despised outsider, presumed to have nothing of the spirit of God’s mercy and compassion, gives the Jew lying on the ground the attention that the two other religious-minded men refuse to give. In fact, the Samaritan went to extraordinary lengths to take care of the injured man, sparing no expense. Two silver coins may not seem very much but it represented two day’s wages and would have been enough to keep someone for up to two months in a wayside inn.

It is difficult for us at this distance to understand the impact that such a story would have had on the traditional Jewish listener, not to mention a scribe. In our world today it would be something like a Palestinian terrorist coming to the help of a militant Israeli who has been abandoned by fellow-Israelis (or vice versa); it would be something like a violently anti-Catholic North of Ireland Protestant being helped by an IRA member while two ardent Unionists do not want to get involved.

Perhaps the reader can think of examples closer to home.

The question of Jesus is interesting: “Which of the three was a neighbour to the man who was waylaid?” The answer of the scribe is equally interesting: “The one who showed compassion towards him.”

The answer then to the question, “Who is my neighbour?” is not, as we learnt in our catechism, “Everybody”, though that is true. The answer of Jesus is: “A neighbour is someone who shows compassion to another in need - irrespective of who the helper or the person in need may be.” It is less a question of seeing every other person as my neighbour but, much more importantly, of my being actively a neighbour to others, not on the basis of their race, nationality, occupation, gender, skin colour, personality but on the basis of need. And who does not need love and compassion?

Finally, in answer to an academic, theological question, “Who is my neighbour?” Jesus tells the scribe not WHAT or WHO is his neighbour but to go and BE a neighbour.

The story has a secondary lesson for us about stereotyping. For the Jews there was the negative stereotype of the Samaritan (which was probably reciprocated). Our world today is full of stereotypes. We have stereotypes of practically every race and ethnic group and skin colour and they can influence our attitudes deeply and often unconsciously.

Certainly, each race can have recognisable characteristics - Jews, Italians, Irish, Germans, French, Chinese, Indians, Japanese, Africans - arising from language and traditions but it is an irrational jump to attribute to every member of a group generalised characteristics.

We can never say that “Irish are. . .”, or “Chinese are. . .”, or “Africans are. . .” There are too many exceptions. Every individual person has to be approached individually and there are good, bad and indifferent people to be found in every group, including our own. But they all have one thing in common: they should be confident of being helped by good neighbours in their time of need.

Week 27 | Tuesday

Jonah 3:1-10; Luke 10:38-42

FIRST READING (Jonah 3:1-10)

After his three days and nights in the belly of the big fish, Jonah was, at the word of God, vomited on to the shore. Without delay, the word of Yahweh comes to Jonah a second time. It is almost as if God was saying to his prophet, “OK! Let’s try one more time.”

Jonah is told again to rise up, to go to Nineveh and to preach to it in the words that Yahweh will lay down. That, of course, is the role of the prophet - to pass on a message from God not to preach his own word. A much chastened Jonah now submissively, if not with much enthusiasm and against his better judgement, obeys and sets out for Nineveh. He is not expecting much response.

Nineveh is a city, we are told, “great beyond compare”. Literally, it is “great in the eyes of God”, which is the strongest superlative in the Hebrew language. So big, in fact, that it took three days to walk across it.

Later in the story we are told that the city had more than 120,000 inhabitants, just a large town by today’s standards. Archaeological excavations indicate that the later imperial city of Nineveh was about 12 km round. The fact, however, that “a visit required three days” may suggest a larger area, such as the four-city complex of Nineveh, Rehoboth Ir, Calah and Resen mentioned in Genesis 10. Greater Nineveh covered an area of some 100 km in circumference.

On the other hand, “three days” seems to have been a conventional way of describing a medium-length distance. But, as we are dealing here with a story, the author simply wants to say that Nineveh was a very big place with a lot of people.

Having arrived at Nineveh, Jonah had only walked one day’s distance into the city proclaiming Yahweh’s warning: “Only 40 days more and Nineveh will be overthrown”, when the people responded immediately and believed God’s word.

The 40 days are reminiscent of the 40 days of the Flood or the 40 years of Israel wandering in the desert. Jesus will also fast for 40 days in the desert and, in the Acts of the Apostles, ascend to his Father 40 days after his Resurrection.

A fast was then proclaimed and everyone put on sackcloth - all conventional signs of repentance for sin. This speedy conversion of the Ninevites after hearing God’s word will be commented on later by Jesus and contrasted with the reluctance of the Scribes and Pharisees to accept Jesus’ word.” At the judgement, the citizens of Nineveh will rise with the present generation and be the ones to condemn it. At the preaching of Jonah, they reformed their lives; but you have a greater than Jonah here” (Matt 12:41).

When the proclamation reached the king’s ears, even he rose from his throne, divested himself of his royal garments, put on sackcloth and sat in ashes. This is the mighty King of Assyria, king of an empire which brought so much suffering to the Chosen People. Here he is, humbly submitting to Yahweh and acknowledging his sinfulness.

Further, he gives orders for a general fast from eating and even drinking water, an order extended to both people and animals. And he gives the order: “All must put on sackcloth and call on God with all their might; and let everyone renounce his evil ways and violent behaviour.” Inclusion of domestic animals was unusual but here it expresses the urgency with which the Ninevites were to seek mercy.

“Who knows?” said the king.”Perhaps God will change his mind and relent and renounce his burning wrath, so that we shall not perish.” He knew they deserved any punishment God could send them but they lived in hope that Jonah’s God might relent and put aside his great anger against them. In Jeremiah Yahweh says, “Sometimes I threaten to uproot and tear down and destroy a nation or a kingdom. But if that nation which I have threatened turns from its evil, I also repent of the evil which I threatened to do” (Jer 18:7-8)

And, indeed, God does see their efforts to abandon their evil ways and withdraws the disaster he had planned for the city.

One would imagine that Jonah would have been absolutely delighted with such a response to his preaching and with the conversion of the Ninevites to the Lord but he reacted very strangely indeed. For his actual response we will have to wait for tomorrow’s reading.

Like the pagan sailors in the boat, the people of Nineveh show that they are ready to change their ways and recognise the power of Yahweh. Ironically, the one rebellious person in the story is a member of his own People and his prophet.

In our world, too, non-Christians can frequently put us to shame in the way they show a Christian spirit.

GOSPEL (Luke 10:38-42)

Today we find Jesus in the home of the sisters, Mary and Martha. We know that they have a brother named Lazarus. We meet the sisters again, showing the same characteristics as in this story, in John’s account of the raising from death of their brother (John 11:1-44). They lived in Bethany, a village about 3-4 km from Jerusalem and it seems that Jesus was a familiar visitor to the house for at the time of Lazarus’ illness Jesus is told: “Your friend Lazarus is sick.”

The story of Martha and Mary is, in a way, a contrast to the previous story about the Good Samaritan. It restores a balance in our following of Christ. The story about being a neighbour could lead us to think that only if we are doing things are we loving God.

Martha was a doer to the point of being a fusspot. Martha, we are told, was “burdened with much serving”. Serving is something that Jesus himself did constantly and he urged his followers to do the same. But it should not be a burden. And, after Martha had complained about her sister, Jesus told her that she was “anxious and worried about many things”. A true servant does not experience anxiety and worry. It signifies a lack of peace.

Because Mary seemed to be doing nothing, Martha saw her as idling and even selfish. Martha must have been somewhat surprised when Jesus said that Mary had “chosen the better part” which would “not be taken from her”.

What was that better part? Was Mary just sitting at the feet of Jesus and doing nothing? No. We are told that she was “listening to him speak”. Listening to his message is something Jesus tells his disciples and the crowd they need to be doing all the time. And we have mentioned before that listening involves understanding, accepting and assimilating that message so that it becomes part of our very selves

If we do not spend time listening to him, how can we know that our activity is properly directed? It is easy for us Christians to be very busy but are we busy about the right things?

To answer that question we have to stop to listen, to discern and to pray. And, ultimately, the highest form of activity in our lives is contemplation, being in conscious contact with God and his Word. If I find myself saying that I do not have time to give some time to prayer or contemplation each day, then there is a serious imbalance in my priorities and in my understanding of what it means to love and serve my God.

This story blends nicely with the parable of the Good Samaritan which went before it. Taken together they express what should be the essence of Christian living - action for others that is guided by what we learn in contemplation. This was the pattern of Jesus’ own life - he spent long hours bringing healing to people’s lives (being a neighbour) but also retired to quiet places to be alone in communion with his Father. The same pattern must be ours too. We call it being “contemplatives in action”.

+++

Week 27 | Wednesday

Jonah 4:1-11; Luke 11:1-4

FIRST READING (Jonah 4:1-11)

After having single-handedly (with some help from the Lord, of course) converted a city of 120,000 people from the king downwards, one would have thought that Jonah would have been filled with a wonderful sense of achievement. At best, he would have thanked and praised God for his wonderful works; at the least, he would have been patting himself on the back for being such an effective prophet.

Instead, we find him in a foul humour and very angry. He is angry that God could have compassion on a longstanding enemy of Israel, one who had caused great suffering to God’s people. God’s goodness should be shown only to Israelites, not to Gentiles and certainly not to Assyrians.

His self-righteous world has been turned upside down. As a devout Hebrew, one of God’s chosen and a prophet to boot, he has regarded all unbelieving Gentiles as deserving only of God’s fiercest punishments. That was why he did not want to have anything to do with them; that was why he wanted to flee as far from them as he could get.

He is very disappointed in his God but attributes it to God’s basic weakness.”Please, Yahweh, isn’t this what I said would happen when I was still in my own country? That is why I first tried to flee to Tarshish, since I knew you were a tender, compassionate God, slow to anger, rich in faithful love, who relents about inflicting disaster.” This description of Yahweh is one which God himself gave to Moses (Exod 34:6-7) at Sinai and becomes a formula repeated more than once in the Old Testament. God’s gentle patience is in strong contrast to Jonah’s anger.

“So now, Yahweh, please take my life, for I might as well be dead as go on living.” To Jonah, God’s mercy to the Ninevites means an end to Israel’s favoured standing with him. Jonah shortly before has rejoiced in his deliverance from death in the sea, but now that the pagan and sinful Nineveh lives, in anger and frustration he prefers to die. But Yahweh asks, “Are you right to be angry?” He is angry because God has not treated the Ninevites the way Jonah thinks they deserve.

Jonah then leaves the city and sits down to the east of the city where he makes a shelter for himself. He wants to see what is going to happen to the city. He expects and hopes that a terrible destruction is going to come down on it. After all, at the beginning of the story God had said how angry he was with the Ninevites.

His shelter does not seem to have been very effective because Yahweh God then ordains that a castor-oil plant should grow up over Jonah to give shade for his head and soothe his bad humour. This is the first of three occasions in the paragraph where something happens because Yahweh “ordains” it.

Jonah is delighted with the shelter the castor-oil plant provides. A castor oil plant is a shrub growing over 4 metres high with large, shady leaves. God graciously increases the comfort of his stubbornly defiant prophet. Jonah sees no contradiction between God being kind to him, when he disobeys Yahweh, and his being kind to the Ninevites who have promised to give up their sinful ways and disobedience.

But, just when Jonah is enjoying the shade of the tree, God “ordains” that it should be attacked by a worm which causes the tree to wither. On top of that, Yahweh further “ordains” that there should be a scorching east wind blowing in from the desert. Without shelter and under the blazing sun, Jonah feels absolutely miserable: “I might as well be dead as to go on living.”

God then quietly asks Jonah, “Are you right to be angry about the castor-oil plant?” Jonah replies, “I have every right to be angry, mortally angry!” But it is now time for Jonah to learn his lesson. The message is clear. Everything is God’s doing. He is the ultimate Lord. He gives and he takes away. And he gives and takes to whomever he will - Jew or Gentile.

Jonah has got all worked up over a tree which, without any effort on his part, appeared overnight and just as quickly disappeared. Why should Yahweh, then, not be concerned for Nineveh, a city of 120,000 people, “who cannot tell their right hand from their left”, not to mention the animals.

Jonah can only see wilfully wicked people but Yahweh sees a people, who, like small children, need a father’s gentle compassion to point them in the right direction.

The message of the story is clear. It says that God’s compassion reaches out to every single person. Jonah, representing a certain class of Israelite, whom we see later in the Gospel, could not extend God’s compassion to the Gentile. Jonah and his countrymen traditionally rejoiced in God’s special mercies to Israel but wished only his wrath on their enemies. God here rebukes such hardness and proclaims his own graciousness.

In the story, God takes compassion on Jonah, when he is thrown into the stormy sea, on Nineveh which repented of its sin and even on the prophet in his moment of self-pity. At the end, Yahweh explains with gentle irony how his solicitude extends even to the animals - how much more then to men, women and children, “who cannot tell their right hand from their left”. The story thus prepares the way for the Gospel: God IS Love (cf. 1 John 4).

And this is the lesson of the whole book. It is a lesson in tolerance. It is a lesson that others besides God’s chosen people can be forgiven their sin, that they can repent of their sin, that they can be open to the influence of God and do good things.

In this book we are very close to the spirit of the New Testament where Jesus comes to save and not to condemn. The first Christians were all Jews and it came as something of a surprise to them that Gentiles could receive and respond to the Spirit of Jesus just as well as they could.

Jonah is a book attacking narrow-minded bigotry and sectarianism. As such its message is still all too relevant in a world where cynics say that the world would be better off without religions which are the source of so much suffering, violence and divisiveness. Let us remove all bigotry and intolerance from our Christian lives. Let us rejoice to see the Spirit working in other people and be happy to work with them to bring about the Kingdom.

GOSPEL (Luke 11:1-4)

It is surely no coincidence that Jesus’ commendation of Mary for spending time listening to Jesus should be followed by a section on prayer.

Luke’s gospel has been called the Gospel of Prayer. It is in his gospel, more than any of the others, that we are told about Jesus praying, especially before the more important moments of his public life, such as at his baptism, the choosing of the Twelve, before Peter’s confession of his Messiahship and in the garden before his Passion.

Today we see Jesus just praying somewhere and we get the impression that it was something he did quite often. We mentioned earlier that it was perfectly natural for Jesus to pray to his Father, if we understand by prayer being in close contact with God.

Sometimes it will be to ask him for help in our lives or in making the right decision, sometimes it will be to thank and praise him, sometimes it will be to pray on behalf of someone else and sometimes it will just to be in his company. We saw this yesterday with Mary of Bethany sitting quietly at the feet of Jesus listening to him. In fact, a lot of our prayer should be in silent listening. Some people talk so much in their prayer that God cannot get a word in! And then they complain he does not answer their prayers!

After seeing him pray on this occasion, Jesus’ disciples asked him to teach them how to pray. In reply, he gives them what we know as the Lord’s Prayer. It is not quite the form we are familiar with, which comes from Matthew’s gospel. It is simpler but the basic structure is still the same.

Matthew’s text has seven petitions (we know how he likes the number ‘seven’) but Luke only five.

It is believed that Matthew follows an earlier form which may be closer to Luke’s.

When Jesus taught this to his disciples did he mean that praying meant reciting this formula at regular intervals? In fact, it is (in Matthew’s version) a formula we all know by heart and which we recite regularly during the Eucharist, when we say the Rosary and on many other occasions. But it seems more likely that Jesus intended to do more than just teach them a formula to be recited. It is probably much better to see his words as an answer to their request: “Lord, teach us how to pray.” This is not the same as “Teach us some prayers to say/recite.”

We will get much more out of the Lord’s Prayer if we take each petition separately and see each one as a theme about which we can pray. We can take each petition separately and spend time praying around each one. When we do that seriously and conscientiously we will see that it is a very challenging prayer.

Let us briefly look at the petitions as they are in Luke:

Father:

To begin with, let us not get into arguments about God’s gender. We can address God as either Father or Mother; the basic meaning is that God is the source of life, that God is the Creator of every living thing. In addressing God as Father (or Mother) we are acknowledging that we are children, sons and daughters, of God. But if we are children of the one God, then we are brothers and sisters to each other. And there can be no exceptions to this, not even one.

Is this what I mean when I utter the word “Father”? Am I prepared to see every single person on the face of this earth, irrespective of race, nationality, skin colour, class, occupation, age, religion, behaviour. . . as my brother and sister? If not, I have to stop praying at this first word. We can begin to see now what teaching his disciples to pray meant to Jesus as well as to them and us.

May your name be held holy:

God’s name is already holy and nothing we can do can make it any more so. In this petition we are rather asking that the whole world recognise the holiness of God, that the whole world sing with the angels, “Holy, holy, holy. . .” God does not need this but we do. And when we sing like this in all sincerity then we are saying that we belong to him and recognise him as Lord. And it is, in fact, another way of expressing the following petition.

Your kingdom come:

We refer frequently in these reflections to the Kingdom. It is that world where God’s reign prevails in people’s hearts and minds and relationships. A world where people have submitted gladly to that reign and experience the truth and love and beauty of God in their lives and in the way they react with the people around them. It produces a world of freedom, peace and justice for all.

In praying this petition, though, we are not just asking God to bring it about while we sit back and wait. We are also committing ourselves to be partners with God in bringing it about. Our co-operation in this work is of vital importance. To be a Christian, to be a disciple of Jesus is essentially to be involved in this task of making the Kingdom a reality. And it has to begin right now; it is not just to be left to a future existence. (In Matthew’s version we pray: ‘Your kingdom come on earth. ‘)Like many of these petitions, it is a prayer that God’s will be carried through our involvement. Again it is a really challenging prayer.

Give us each day our daily bread:

A prayer that we will be always provided with what we need for our daily living. There is a highly dangerous word buried in the petition. That word is “us”. To whom does “us” refer? My family? my friends? my work companions? my village, town, city, country, nationality, race? Surely it refers to all God’s children without exception.

If that is the case, then we are praying that every single person be supplied with their daily needs. But that cannot happen unless we all get involved. The petition is not simply passing the buck to God. The feeding of our brothers and sisters is the responsibility of all. Yet millions are hungry, other millions suffer from malnutrition as well as being deprived of many of the other essentials of dignified living. Clearly, we are not doing all we could to see that all of “us” have “our” daily bread. So again this is a very dangerous prayer.

It is even more dangerous when we say it in the Eucharist. The Eucharist is the sacrament or sign of a community that takes care of all its members and of others in need. It is the sacrament of breaking bread with brothers and sisters. If we leave the Eucharistic table and do nothing about this then our sign has been a sham.

Forgive us our sins, for we also forgive everyone who is in debt to us:

How easily we say this again and again! Yet it is a very frightening thing to do: to put God’s forgiving us conditional on our forgiving others. Forgiveness and reconciliation must be part and parcel of Christian living and we all know that at times it can be very difficult. Yet, as we see in the book of Jonah (read during Cycle I at this time), our God is so ready to forgive. To be like him, to be “perfect” is to have that same readiness to forgive. Our deepest urge should be not to condemn and punish but to rehabilitate and restore to life.

Do not put us to the test:

We are surrounded by forces which can draw us away from God and all that is true, good and beautiful. We pray that we will not succumb permanently to anything of the sort. We need constantly God’s liberating hand to lift us up as he lifted the drowning Peter. This is the one petition where we depend totally on God’s help.

The Lord’s Prayer is beautiful. It is challenging. It needs to be taken slowly and meditatively so that we have time to enter deeply into each petition. Perhaps as we pray we can stop at just one petition which at this time is particularly meaningful to us and leave the others for another time. It is primarily not a formula to be recited but themes for prayer. Any one petition is enough to last a long time.

Week 27 | Thursday

Readings | Malachi 3:13-20; Luke 11:5-13

FIRST READING (Malachi 3:13-20)

We just have one reading from this book and it comes from the final verses of the last chapter. The Jerusalem Bible entitles the passage, ‘The triumph of the upright on the Day of Yahweh’.

Yahweh is complaining that some of his people are saying harsh things about him. They are complaining, “What is the good of keeping his commands or walking mournfully before Yahweh Sabaoth?” The salvation they have been longing for is not being realised. They feel depressed like mourners in sackcloth and ashes.

On the contrary, it is the proud and arrogant who seem to be the happy ones; those who practise immorality are the ones who prosper and do well out of life. They constantly challenge God’s laws with their behaviour but nothing ever happens to them. What is the point, then, in trying to live a good life?

However, there were some God-fearing people, those who did not give way to doubt and cynicism, who got together in fellowship and gave each other mutual encouragement. They drew up a “book of remembrance” in the Lord’s presence in which were recorded the good deeds “of those who feared him and kept his name in mind”. This book was analogous to the records of notable deeds kept by earthly rulers. In this way, they kept their faith and confidence in Yahweh.

By doing this they could clearly see the difference between the genuinely good person and the wicked one, between the one who served God and the one who did not.

Then comes the prophet’s warning from Yahweh.”The Day of the Lord is on the way, glowing like a furnace.” Fire, smoke and cloud were traditionally a feature of the coming of the Lord. We saw it when Moses and the Israelites were at Sinai. And Isaiah says, for example, “See the name of the Lord coming from afar in burning wrath, with lowering clouds! His lips are filled with fury, his tongue is like a consuming fire” (Is 30:27).

That will be the Day when the proud and the arrogant and those who do evil will be set afire and destroyed root and branch. Speaking about the work of Jesus, John the Baptist told the crowds who came to the Jordan: “His winnowing fan is in his hand. He will clear the threshing floor and gather his grain into the barn, but the chaff he will burn in unquenchable fire” (Matt 3:12).

On the other hand, for those who have remained faithful, even through those days when the evil seemed to prosper, for those who feared the Lord’s name, “the Sun of Justice will rise with healing in his rays”. ‘Sun of Justice” implies power and triumph. Isaiah compared God and his glory with the sun (Is 60:1,19).

The title “Sun of Righteousness”, applied to Christ, has had its influence on the liturgy of Christmas and the Epiphany. Luke speaks of Christ as the “rising sun” from heaven in Zechariah’s hymn known to us as the Benedictus, which is recited every day in the Church’s Divine Office. Zechariah’s son, John the Baptist, will prepare the way for “the rising Sun [who] has come from on high to visit us, to give light to those who live in darkness and in the shadow dark as death, and to guide our feet into the way of peace” (Luke 1:78-79).

Yes, the Light that is Christ has brought healing and wholeness into so many lives. Let us open ourselves to that healing and wholeness also.

However, times and people do not change very much and what Malachi says is still true in our own time. We, too, can be so easily tempted to go the way of those who seek the good life and get carried away by the materialism, consumerism and hedonism that washes over us day after day. We, too, can pay lip service to the call of our faith and just go through the motions of “religious observance”. Let us eat, drink and be merry for as long as we can and then, when the end seems to be on the horizon, we can straighten things out with God.

It is not a very wise way of dealing with a God who can come “like a thief in the night”. It is not a very enlightened choice. On the other hand, once we really enter into the Way of Christ we will find that it is there we find our deepest needs satisfied.

Let us ask God to open our eyes to the true spirit of Jesus’ Gospel and make it the driving force of our lives.

GOSPEL (Luke 11:5-13)

Jesus continues his instructions to his disciples about prayer. Today the lesson is one of perseverance.

Jesus gives the parable of a man coming to a neighbour in the middle of the night looking for some food to provide hospitality to an unexpected visitor. The neighbour is not willing to get up and disturb his wife and children who are sleeping with him (which would be very common in a one-room house). But, says Jesus, if the man persists, the neighbour, simply to get some peace, will eventually get up and give the man all he needs. If a grumpy neighbour will listen to an inconvenient request, how much more will a loving God pay heed to the needs of his children?

In another example Jesus asks if a father would give his child a snake instead of a fish or a scorpion instead of an egg. If even a very ordinary father would not think of treating his children so callously, “if you, with all your sins, know how to give your children good things, how much more will the heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him”.

Of course, a very pertinent question comes to mind: if God is such a loving and caring parent who will only give “good” things to us, why do we have to persist in asking? Why do we have to ask at all? The reason is not because God needs persuading (like the sleepy neighbour). Persistence in prayer is for our benefit.

There are a number of ways of praying persistently. One is to keep begging God to give us something we want or that we think we need. Another is to think that somehow we can manipulate God or put him under some kind of obligation by asking him repeatedly. So, if I do a nine-day novena and say certain prayers each day, I may expect that God or some saint somehow is under an obligation to give me what I am asking for. (In some kinds of novenas or other devotional exercises there are people who tell us that “satisfaction is guaranteed”. This, in fact, is very close to superstition - if not heresy.)

The kind of prayer that Jesus is talking about is really something quite different. He seems to presume that what we are asking for is the gift of God’s Spirit - “how much more will the Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him?” Is that what we normally ask for? To ask for the Spirit is to ask to have the same Spirit that inspired Jesus in his life and work. It is a Spirit which is totally at one with the will of the Father. In the parallel text in Matthew, it is “good” things which the Father will give. What could be more of a “good” thing than the very Spirit of God?

The other types of asking can be a subtle way of asking God to do our will - “Lord, not Thy will but mine be done.” Whatever form our prayer takes, ultimately it must be this: to be like Jesus so that we may grow in the likeness of the Father.”To know him more clearly, love him more dearly, follow him more nearly.”

One of way moving in this direction is to make this the constant theme of our prayer. The more we pray for this the more likely it will become a reality in our lives. And it is inconceivable that God should refuse to hear this prayer.

Week 27 | Friday

Readings | Joel 1:13-15; 2:1-2; Luke 11:15-26

FIRST READING (Joel 1:13-15; 2:1-2)

The prophet calls for repentance for many sins and gives a warning about the Day of Yahweh.

The prophet excludes no one from the need to repent and do penance. He begins with the priests and all those who serve in the Temple. He calls on them to do night-long penance for they have failed in their duties of liturgical service.”For the Temple of your God has been deprived of cereal offering and libation.”

A fast and a solemn assembly of the people is to be proclaimed by the elders. Everyone in the country is to be called together in the Temple. Similar exhortations to repentance and prayer recur in other parts of the book. The interest that Joel displays in formal observance and the liturgy contrasts markedly with the attitude with other prophets such as Amos, Hosea, Micah, and Jeremiah but Joel, too, insists on the need for inward conversion.

In general, fasting was required on the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur) and also practised in times of calamity as a sign of penitence and humility. The New Testament, both the Gospel and Paul, speaks strongly against outward signs that do not reflect a corresponding inward belief or attitude (see Matt 6:1-8; 23:1-36).

The reason for the fast and the assembly is that the “Day of Yahweh” is near, “coming as destruction from Shaddai”. The “Day of Yahweh” occurs five times in Joel and is the dominant theme of the book. Other prophets also use it, such as, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Amos, Obadiah, Zephaniah and Malachi. Sometimes abbreviated as “that Day”, the term often refers to the decisive intervention of God in history, such as through the invasion of locusts in Joel. It can also refer to Christ’s coming at the end of time.

In mentioning ‘Shaddai’ there is a play on the words shod (devastation) and Shaddai (a name of God. The plague of locusts at the beginning of the book heralds the “day of Yahweh”, which is a day of terror, even though, in the context of Joel 3-4, it brings the ultimate triumph of Israel.

The last part of the reading is a sombre warning that the Day of Yahweh is very near. ‘Sound the trumpet’ is a warning of approaching danger and the punishment of Israel for the coming day of wrath. The alarm is to be raised on God’s holy mountain, that is, Mount Zion where the Temple was situated. The trumpet, made of a ram’s or bull’s horn, was used to signal approaching danger. Its sound could fill people with fear. It was also used to summon Israel to religious gatherings. Hence it is to be the signal for the gathering of all the elect on the last day.

The coming Day is a “day of darkness and gloom”, corresponding to the approach of locusts which darken the sky. The plague of locusts mentioned in chapter 1 is a kind of parable for the coming Day of Yahweh. Darkness is a common prophetic figure used of the day of the Lord and generally a metaphor for distress and suffering.

As with the locusts, the day will come “like the dawn”. Usually, dawn usually suggests relief from gloom and the end of darkness. Here, however, it is used ironically, describing the locust infestation spreading across the land like the light of dawn, which first lights up the eastern horizon and then spreads across the whole countryside.

But an infestation of locusts is as nothing compared to the Day of Yahweh, whose like has never been seen before and whose like will never happen again.

Despite the somewhat apocalyptic language, the words of the prophet are still applicable to our own situation. In our Church, too, both priests and people have often failed in their Gospel responsibilities. It is always a time for us to repent and do some purifying penance. We are all, without a single exception, sinners. It is the humble acknowledgment of this that sets us on the way to getting closer to God and Jesus our Lord.

And, in fact, this passage is also used during the liturgy of Lent on Ash Wednesday.

GOSPEL (Luke 11:15-26)

“There are none so blind as those who will not see.”

In today’s passage Jesus frees a person from enslavement to an evil power which had rendered him mute, so that he could not speak. (In Matthew’s version of this story, the man is also blind.) As Christians, many of us can suffer from the same evil influence when we refuse or are afraid to acknowledge openly our Christian faith. We hide and we remain silent, especially when the values we hold are attacked or ridiculed. Once liberated, the man could speak and he did so, much to the amazement of the crowd. Let us, too, pray for this gift of speech, to be able to say the right thing at the right time.

But there were those present who accused Jesus of using the demon’s power to drive out the evil spirit. At the same time, in spite of the extraordinary signs that Jesus was initiating on almost a daily basis - including the one they had just witnessed which caused such astonishment among the people - his enemies asked him for a sign from God.

There is a clear gap between the leaders and the people here. While the leaders keep asking Jesus for his credentials, the people are shown as constantly praising and thanking God for all that is being done among them through Jesus.

Jesus then shows the self-contradictions in his opponents’ charges. A kingdom that is split by internal rivalries cannot survive. Why would evil spirits attack each other and so frustrate their goals? And, Jesus asks his accusers, when their own people drive out demons, by whose power do they do it? “But if it is by the finger of God that I cast out devils, then the reign of God is among you.”

When people are liberated from the control of evil spirits, that is a sure sign that the loving power of God is at work. Any other interpretation does not make sense. And the ‘reign of God’ is personified and embodied in Jesus himself. It will also become present in his disciples who do his work.

And Jesus goes on to give another image. A strong man guarding his house and possessions remains undisturbed until someone stronger comes and overthrows him. That is clearly what is happening. Jesus is the stronger one and the evil spirits are being driven away by him. They are helpless before him. This liberation of people and society from evil powers is one of the most dramatic proofs that the all-powerful reign of God is present in the person of Jesus. What further signs could be asked for?

“The man who is not with me is against me, and the man who does not gather with me scatters.” There can be no neutrality where Jesus is concerned. We have to make our choice - for him or against. Not to choose is itself a choice - against him. Compare this with the similar but actually quite different saying with one we saw earlier (9:50): “Anyone who is not against you is for you”.

This was in the context of the Apostle John complaining that he saw a man cast out demons in Jesus’ name. In so far as that nameless person was doing Jesus’ work and doing it in Jesus’ name, he was with Jesus. That surely has implications for the many good things that non-Catholics and others who are not Christians at all are doing.

And this saying about the non-acceptance of neutrality leads to another warning. It is not enough to have been liberated from the power of an evil spirit. Otherwise it may come back “to find the house swept and tidied” and bring even worse spirits with it. The end result is that the person’s situation is even worse than before. No, the emptiness left by the departure of the evil spirit has to be actively filled with the Spirit of Jesus.

Was Jesus referring to some of the people around him, especially his critics, who, by their meticulous observance of the Law, saw themselves as morally blameless but in whose lives the positive presence of the Spirit, as exemplified in Jesus himself, was totally absent?

This is something we need to reflect on with regard to our use of the Sacrament of Reconciliation. It is easy to use the sacrament to get the forgiveness of our past sins and leave it at that. To have the feeling of now having a clean slate. Nature may abhor a vacuum but the devil loves one! The true reconciliation that the sacrament calls for demands a new and stronger commitment to the living of our Christian life. The sacrament is intended to be an experience of conversion and change. It is much more concerned with the future than with the past. The past is gone and there is nothing we can do about it. The present is in our hands and that is where we meet God.

Week 27 | Saturday

Readings | Joel 4:12-21; Luke 11:27-28

FIRST READING (Joel 4:12-21)

Our second and final reading from the prophet Joel. It is an apocalyptic-style call to a people who are suffering, who see only a bleak future with threats on all sides. It is a message full of hope in the ultimate future.

It begins with a call to the nations. The nations may declare, literally “sanctify”, war on Yahweh and march on Zion but there in the “Valley of Decision” they will meet their judgement and ultimate defeat. It is called ‘holy’ because all war was regarded as a sacred undertaking. Earlier in the chapter, Yahweh had said he would gather all the nations together and take them to the Valley of Jehoshaphat where he would put them on trial. That is now about to happen

The call for the nations is to hammer their ploughshares into swords and their bill-hooks into spears. This is the exact reversal of what is to happen in paradise as described by Isaiah (2:4).

“Let the nations rouse themselves and march to the Velley of Jehoshaphat, for there I will sit in judgement on all the nations around.” The valley of Jehospaphat is called the “Valley of Decision” later in the passage. It seems to be a symbolic name for a valley near Jerusalem that is here depicted as the place of God’s ultimate judgment on the nations gathered against Jerusalem. It was there that King Jehoshaphat had witnessed one of the Lord’s historic victories over the nations.

“Ply the sickle for the harvest is ripe; come and tread, for the winepress is full. The vats are overflowing so great is their wickedness.” Because of their numerous crimes, the nations are ripe for punishment. The use of warlike weapons against them is likened to the use of reaping instruments on the fields and vines at harvest time.

As a result of the Lord’s great army (the plague of locusts) that had marched against Judah (2:3-11), there have been no harvests. That harvest was now to be restored. In the final great day of the Lord, there will also be a harvest - the harvest of God’s judgment on the nations. Revelation (14:14-20) draws heavily on this picture of judgment.

“Multitude on multitude in the Valley of Decision! For the Day of Yahweh is near in the Valley of the Verdict!” The word for “decision” also means an instrument with sharp wheels or stones used in threshing. Just as the threshing machine divides the wheat from the chaff so will God’s decision be against those who have been unfaithful. The valley is now viewed as the place where that decree will be executed.

Next comes a brief description of the Day of Yahweh.

“Sun and moon grow dark, the stars lose their brilliance. Yahweh roars from Zion, he thunders from Jerusalem; heaven and earth tremble.” The language is apocalyptic. Yahweh will roar, like a lion, and destroy the unbelieving nations. And, as God at the head of his army had thundered against Jerusalem, so he will on that day thunder against Jerusalem’s enemies, and he will do so from his royal city, Zion, from which he rules his “inheritance”.

In the third and last part of the reading, God blesses his people in a dual way: negatively, by destroying their enemies; and positively, by giving them good things.

On the Day of Yahweh his people will know that he is Yahweh their God, residing on Zion, his holy mountain. Jerusalem will be his sanctuary and it will never again be over-run by the foreigner. The Lord from now on will be with his people forever. The final blessed state of the now unholy and vulnerable city will be God’s abiding presence in her. Then she will be holy and impregnable.

Times of plenty are coming.”When that Day comes, the mountains will run with new wine and the hills will flow with milk and all the stream-beds of Judah will run with water.” The Eden-like lushness pictured in this verse is in great contrast to the terrible drought which followed the plague of locusts.

“A fountain will spring from Yahweh’s Temple and water the Gorge of the Acacias.” Flowing out from God’s presence, streams of blessing will refresh his people and make their place endlessly fruitful. The location of the ‘gorge of Acacias’ is uncertain in this apocalyptic description of the new Jerusalem. If a plant is referred to, then, since acacias flourish in dry soil, the picture is of a desert now with an abundance of water.

On the other hand, “Egypt will become a desolation, and Edom a desert waste on account of the violence done to the children of Judah whose innocent blood they shed in their country.” Egypt and Edom were old enemies of Israel and here represent all those nations hostile to God’s people.

All life-sustaining blessings are removed from these nations, thus setting in sharp focus the contrasting destiny of God’s people and the enemies of God’s kingdom. This picture of desolation also recalls the earlier description of Judah’s condition after the locusts.

But “Judah will be inhabited forever, and Jerusalem from generation to generation! ‘I shall avenge their blood and let none go unpunished,’ and Yahweh will dwell in Zion.” Once God’s judgment and redemption are complete, his kingdom will endure and flourish forever. And this book of judgment ends on a promising and encouraging note: “The Lord dwells in Zion” and therefore all will be right with those who trust in God and live with him.

We do not now hold that God preserves any particular place for ever, not Jerusalem, not Rome. For us, Zion is not a physical place. God is present not in stones but in the hearts of those who open themselves to him, who hear his word and keep it. The ‘New Jerusalem’ is not a place but the composite of all those who are in loving relationship with God and with each other because of Him. As Jesus told the Samaritan woman: “The hour is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain [Gerizim] nor in Jerusalem. An hour is coming, and is already here, when authentic worshippers will worship the Father in Spirit and truth. Indeed, it is just such worshippers the Father seeks” (John 4:23)

This brings us to the end of our selection of readings from the post-Exilic prophets which began in the 25th Week, that is, three weeks ago. We have read passages from Ezra, Haggai, Zechariah, Nehemiah, Baruch, Jonah, Malachi, and Joel. What they have in common is that all come from the same period, following the return of the Hebrews from exile in Babylon. Two are historical books (Ezra and Nehemiah) and the rest are from prophets. And they have appeared more or less in chronological order.

On Monday we will return to reading from the New Testament.

GOSPEL (Luke 11:27-28)

Is today’s short passage linked to yesterday’s, because it begins, “Now as Jesus was speaking. . .”?

After Jesus has effectively silenced his opponents and their ridiculous accusations, a woman cries out from the surrounding crowd: “Happy the womb that bore you and the breasts you sucked!” It was a beautiful tribute first to Jesus himself but also to his mother (someone, presumably, totally unknown to the speaker). In more contemporary terms we might rephrase it as, “May God bless the woman that produced such a fine son as you!” This woman is clearly one of the crowd that has been amazed at the work that Jesus is doing in contrast to the cynical unbelievers who want to destroy Jesus.

And, indeed, we on a very different level do recognise the extraordinary privilege that was Mary’s to be the Mother of God’s only Son. We pray to Mary, “Blessed are you among women.”

But Jesus turns the woman’s words around.”Still happier are those who hear the word of God and keep it!” Greatness in God’s eyes lies not in gifts and privileges that have been granted but in the response that is given to God.

The true source of Mary’s greatness was not in her being chosen to be Jesus’ mother, nor even in her preservation from original sin but in that unconditional ‘Yes’ she gave to the angel at the Annunciation. A ‘Yes’ she faithfully honoured to the day she stood in grief at the foot of the cross.

She heard the word and she kept it - to the very end.

Some of the people we saw Jesus arguing with yesterday were powerful and influential in their society; they were the ‘great’ ones of that society. But they neither heard nor saw nor kept the word of God, although they claimed to be experts in it.

And even Jesus himself was not great just because of his powers over demons or his ability to silence his accusers but because he, too, heard the word of his Father and kept it. There was a total identity between what his Father wanted and what Jesus was saying and doing.

For us, too, it must be exactly the same. That is the only greatness that matters, the only greatness that we need be concerned about.

Week 28 | Monday

Readings | Romans 1:1-7; Luke 11:29-32

FIRST READING (Romans 1:1-7)

Today we return to the New Testament and begin reading Paul’s Letter to the Romans. This is one of the most important of his letters and one of the key books of the New Testament. It is listed first among the Pauline letters not only because of its importance but because it is also the longest. (The Pauline letters are listed according to their length and not in chronological order.) We will spend the whole of the next four weeks on this letter, up to the end of Week 31.

The letter seems to have been written in Corinth or nearby Cenchrea in southern Greece about the year 57 AD. By this time, the Christians in Rome were mainly Gentile with Jewish Christians in a minority. Apparently, Paul was planning a missionary journey to Spain (then a Roman colony) with the intention of using Rome as his headquarters. He had not yet been to Rome but must have been informed about the Christian situation there and he must have been known to them.

The principal theme of the Letter is the relationship between Christianity and Judaism, a question which is also dealt with in the Letter to Galatians. While there is a more urgent tone in the Galatian letter, the Letter to the Romans treats the question in a more measured way. Paul was a strong advocate of the freedom from the Law which Christianity brought and constantly opposed the efforts of some Jewish Christians to re-impose the requirements of the Law, including circumcision. It is under this heading that the great issue of “justification by faith” is discussed and whose interpretation became the great dividing issue during the Reformation.

In the usual way of the time the letter begins with greetings, with Paul identifying himself and the church to which he is writing. But, as is usual with Paul, his words are always much more than the banalities that normally accompany the beginnings of letters (including our own). The very opening words are almost a battle cry: “Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, set apart to proclaim the gospel of God. . .”

- As a “servant” (doulos, doulos). The word literally means a ‘slave’, someone who belongs completely to his owner, but it also means ‘servant’, someone who willingly chooses to serve a master.

- As someone called to an “apostle”. The word ‘apostle’ originally means someone sent on a special mission. It is used in the Gospel for the Twelve followers Jesus chose to continue his mission. Paul regarded himself as an apostle because, like the Twelve, he had seen the risen Christ (on the road to Damascus) and had been given a special mission to bring the Gospel to the Gentiles.

- As someone “set apart” for the service of the Gospel. His mission was not something he had decided on himself. Jesus had specially chosen him for a special mission to proclaim the Gospel of the Kingdom. Everyone of us is called in this way. How would I describe my vocation?

In a way, every baptised Christian can say the same in some degree. We are all servants of Jesus, putting ourselves totally at his disposal for his work. We are all called to be apostles, in the sense that each of us has a mission in our own particular way to proclaim the Gospel message. We have all been set apart for the gospel of God, that is, the euanggelion (euaggelion), the good news that God brings to the world through Jesus Christ and through each one of his members. How would I describe my unique vocation? In what way can I share the Gospel with others?

It is interesting that Paul uses the word “gospel” because the four gospels in the form in which we know them were not yet in existence. But the idea was already present. The “Good News” about Jesus was already being proclaimed. It is a gospel, as Paul implies, which did not just drop out of the sky but which had long been prepared for by the prophets and teachers of the Hebrew Testament. (Remember the words of Jesus to the two disciples on the way to Emmaus as he explained the Old Testament to them.)

In his opening greeting Paul often adds in his own Christian point of view and even anticipates some of the themes of his letter. In Romans these themes are:

- God’s freedom to choose his people;

- the connection between faith and being made ‘holy’;

- salvation through Christ’s death and resurrection;

- the harmony of the two Testaments - the Old and the New.

He now gives describes the Gospel he is going to write about.”This is the gospel concerning his Son who, in terms of human nature, was born a descendant of David and who, in terms of the Spirit and of holiness was designated Son of God in power by resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ, our Lord.” Here we have the elements of the Incarnation described and the link between Old and New Testaments.

In human terms, Jesus was born a descendant of David but because God raised him to life through the Holy Spirit, Christ is established in glory as Lord (Kyrios), and meriting in virtue of his work as Messiah-Redeemer King the name he had from all time - “Son of God”.

And it is through Jesus Christ that “we have received the grace of our apostolic mission to win the obedience of faith among all the nations for the glory of his name”. To be with and under Christ is both a “grace”, a totally unmerited gift, and a responsibility to be partners with Jesus in bringing peoples everywhere to faith and personal commitment to Christ and the Gospel he proclaims. This is where life in its truest form is to be found.

The Christians of Rome, to whom Paul is writing, are included among these “graced” ones called to live and proclaim the Gospel because “by his call you belong to Jesus Christ”. Our mission, too, is to spread his name to all those who do not know him, inviting them to submit themselves in faith and trust to Jesus as Lord, as the Way, the Truth and Life.

Then there comes the end of the initial salutation: “To you all, God’s beloved in Rome, called to be his holy people. Grace and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.”

In calling them God’s “holy” people, he is not saying that they are already saints ready for canonisation. The word ‘holy’ (hagios, ‘agios) really means ‘set apart’ and is applied to the Christians in general. All Christians are ‘saints’ in that they are “set apart” to God and are experientially being made increasingly “holy” by the Holy Spirit working in them. This ‘setting apart’ is not to be understood as removing themselves from surrounding society; on the contrary they are to be fully inserted in society as Jesus was. Only in this way can they be the salt of the earth or the yeast in the dough or the light of the world.

And he wishes the “grace” and “peace”, grace and peace that only God and his Son can give.”Grace” can be understood as the tangible experience of God’s love in my life and “peace” is that inner sense of wholeness and harmony with God, with other people, with oneself and one’s whole environment. Could one have more precious gifts or could one wish more precious gifts on another person?

Let us remember today our calling as servants, as apostles and as a people set apart for a very special work, witnessing to Christ and his Gospel through the particular circumstances of our lives.

GOSPEL (Luke 11:29-32)

Jesus had just said (last Saturday’s reading) that “Blessed are those who hear the word of God and keep it”.

Now, with large crowds pressing around him, he throws out a warning which indicates that not many are hearing the word in the sense of accepting and following it.”This is an evil generation,” he says. Why? Because it keeps asking for a sign, by which Jesus can prove his credentials. Today he says the only sign they will be given is the sign of Jonah.

Jonah was a sign from God to the people of Nineveh, a pagan city which heard his message, repented and was reconciled to God. Jesus too comes on a mission from God (“as the Father has sent me”) and he will find a hearing - not from many of his own people, but from Gentiles.

So, Jesus says, the “queen of the south”, will stand in judgement on the present generation for she, a Gentile outsider, came from a long distance to listen to the wisdom of Solomon. But the Jesus who faces this generation is far greater than Solomon. The “queen of the south” is the queen of Sheba, whose visit to Solomon is recorded in 1 Kings 10:1-10.

Similarly, the people of Nineveh, the great pagan and wicked city, will stand in judgement over the present generation, because they repented at the message of Jonah. But Jesus is greater than Jonah and they refuse to listen to him.

There is always a danger that we take our faith for granted. Worse, we may even feel we are in a superior and safer position than others not of our faith or denomination. The fact that we carry the name ‘Catholic’ is not enough. Baptism and the reception of the other sacraments is not by itself a guarantee of our salvation. What counts is that we hear, understand, accept and assimilate the word of Jesus and carry it out at every moment of our lives.

Week 28 | Tuesday

Readings | Romans 1:16-25; Luke 11:37-41

FIRST READING (Romans 1:16-25)

Paul begins: I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, although it is a message that meets with a lot of opposition and ridicule. Because “it is God’s power for the salvation of everyone who has faith - Jews first, but Greeks as well.” This also expresses the theme of the whole Letter.

In speaking of shame, perhaps he is thinking of his coming journey to Rome, the capital of a whole empire, with all its pagan sophistication. There were many other places where his message was ridiculed such as Athens and Ephesus, to give just two examples.

Right at the beginning he uses the word “faith”, the understanding of which is at the centre of his whole message. The characteristics of Christian faith may, as presented in the New Testament, may be listed as follows:

A response of the human being to God as Truth and Goodness

The one source of salvation

Requires belief in the Son and the kerygma (khrugma) or proclamation made by the Apostles, which says that

God raised Jesus from the dead,

made him Kyrios (Lord) and

through him offers life to all who believe in him.

Is a necessary condition for salvation.

Is not only intellectual assent but includes trusting and obeying the life-giving Truth

Is reliance on God and not on self

So is in contrast with the old order of the Law and its vain search for holiness by works.

Only faith can bring about true holiness

In so far as faith is related to the promise made to Abraham it makes salvation accessible to all, pagans included.

Coupled with baptism, it calls for public profession

and expresses itself in love (agape, ‘agaph).

Faith is supported by hope.

It must be allowed to grow amid struggles and sufferings, demanding fortitude and tenacity right up to the vision and possession of God.

(cf. note in Jerusalem Bible, loc. cit.)

Because Paul sees the Gospel as the “power of God”, it brings salvation, wholeness and life to all who accept it, Jews and Gentiles alike. This is something he has personally experienced. The Gospel reveals the “justice” of God, his inner truth and goodness and harmony which we are invited to share. The key to reaching it is faith: the acceptance of the truth of the message and a total commitment in trust to basing our lives on the message and its Messenger.

Salvation comes to “Jews first”. In the actual development of salvation history the Jews come first. In John’s gospel Jesus tells the Samaritan woman that “salvation comes from the Jews” (John 4:22).

Jesus, the Messiah, was himself a Jew. The “very words of God” (3:2), the covenants, Law, Temple worship, revelation of the divine glory, and the Messianic prophecies came first to the Jews. These privileges, however, were not extended to the Jews because of their superior merit or because of God’s partiality towards them. It was necessary that the invasion of this world by the Gospel begin at a particular point with a particular people, who in turn were responsible to carry that gospel to the other nations.

And Paul is not ashamed of the Gospel because “in it is revealed the saving justice of God: a justice based on faith and addressed to faith. As it says in scripture: ‘Anyone who is upright through faith will live’”. ‘Justice’ here is not the justice of giving someone what belongs to them but speaks rather of the inner goodness of God, who extends his promise of salvation to all as a free gift. But the experience of this justice requires a faith and trust in God as Lord of one’s life.

Paul now moves on to consider the fate of those unbelievers who totally reject God.

“The retribution (literally, anger) of God from heaven is being revealed against the ungodliness and injustices of human beings who in their injustice hold back the truth.”

In developing the theme of righteousness/justice from God, Paul sets the stage by showing that all have sinned and therefore need the righteousness that only God can provide. He shows the sin of the Gentiles and the sin of the Jews and then summarises the sin of all - Gentile and Jew alike.

He begins by saying that no one - not even one who has never heard of the Scripture or of Christ - has an excuse for not honouring God, because the whole created world reveals him. The ‘anger’ of God is not a petulant, irrational burst, such as humans often exhibit, but a holy, just revulsion against what is contrary to and opposes his holy nature and will. This ‘anger’ is being revealed now in the wicked becoming the victims of their own evil acts. By their behaviour they “hold back the truth”. That is, they block the truth about God which is so clearly evident in our created world.

“For what can be known about God is perfectly plain to them, since God has made it plain to them: ever since the creation of the world, the invisible existence of God and his everlasting power have been clearly seen by the mind’s understanding of created things.” Reason alone, by observing the beauty of creation all around, can easily come to an awareness of the Source of all these things. As the poet, whom we have cited a number of times before, said, “The world is charged with the grandeur of God”. A sentiment which has been repeated by poets and artists all down the centuries and in every culture.

Hence, “these people have no excuse: they knew God and yet they did not honour him as God or give thanks to him, but their arguments became futile and their uncomprehending minds were darkened.” An awareness of a Creator being responsible for such Truth, Goodness and Beauty naturally leads to some form of worship. It leads to forms of praise and thanks and worship. Thanks for many earthly blessings such as sun, rain and crops and prayers when these things are lacking. Again, this is a phenomenon found in some form in every human culture.

Instead, “while they claimed to be wise, in fact they were growing so stupid that they exchanged the glory of the immortal God for an imitation, for the image of a mortal human being, or of birds, or animals, or crawling things.” The glory of God in nature was replaced by the making of all kinds of images - in the likeness of humans, birds, animals, reptiles. Even the sophisticated Greeks and Romans, with all their enlightened philosophies, indulged in such idolatries and superstitions.

The result of such behaviour was that God “abandoned them in their inmost cravings to filthy practices of dishonouring their own bodies”. The Gentile temples all over the Near East and the Mediterranean were notorious for the sexual indulgences and perversions which were widely practiced. In Paul’s letters we read how even Christians were tempted and often fell.

The traditional biblical phrase “God abandoned”, or “left them”, used three times for emphasis, means that religious error, if blameworthy, results in moral and social ills. Sin produces its own consequences and its own punishment. Though Paul judges and condemns pagan society he does not condemn individuals (whose intentions God alone must judge) since he presupposes that there are pagans who obey the natural law written in their hearts.

What so many of the Gentiles did was to exchange God’s truth for a lie, because they worshipped and served a creature instead of the Creator.

We have been blessed with the revelation of God which has come to us through the scriptures and especially through Jesus Christ the Word of God and his Church. Even so, we too can profit by seeking and finding God’s active presence in the world in which we live and spend our days. We live, as Teilhard de Chardin wrote, in a “divine milieu”, an environment where every single thing we come in contact with is touched by God. And there is the beautiful phrase, “The sacrament of the present moment”, where every single moment of every day is a sign of God’s presence and love. We are never alone.

GOSPEL (Luke 11:37-41)

Jesus continues to highlight what is central to our relationship with God. We skip over a short passage which is about various aspects of light. In short, the Christian is to be a person full of light through and through. Not like the kind of people Jesus now goes on to describe.

He had been invited to dinner by a Pharisee. Jesus apparently went straight into the dining area and reclined at the table prepared to eat. The Pharisee was quite shocked because Jesus had not first washed his hands before eating. Of course, we are strongly recommended to wash our hands before sitting down to eat. But here we are not dealing with a question of hygiene but of ritual washing. Jesus had omitted to perform a religious ritual which was laid down by the stricter Jews, although not actually part of the Law. [The rule probably had originally a hygienic purpose. By giving it a religious sanction one made sure that it was carried out. Many other obligations, some of them contained in the Mosaic Law e. g. in Leviticus, seem to be of the same kind. ]

Most probably, Jesus, in the ordinary course of events, would have had no problem about performing this ritual but it is likely that here he is deliberately making a point. It allows him to draw attention to what he sees as false religion. A person’s virtue is not to be judged by his performance or non-performance of an external rite.

As Jesus tells this man in a graphic image, the Pharisees concentrate on making sure that the outside of the cup is clean while inside it is full of all kinds of depravity and corruption (like the judgmental thoughts in this man’s mind and the sinister plotting that the Pharisees in general were directing against Jesus). God is as much, if not much more, concerned about the inside as the outside.

Instead, Jesus suggests that they give alms to the poor and, when the inside is clean, there is no need to worry about the outside. Giving alms is a positive act of kindness to another person; it is an act of love and compassion. It neutralises the greed and rapacity of which he accuses them. It is not, like the washing of hands, a purely empty ritual which says little and is almost totally self-directed.

It is so easy to judge people, including our fellow-Catholics, by their observance or non-observance of certain Christian customs, which of themselves are of a non-moral nature. In the past, for instance, we might have criticised a woman for not wearing a hat in church or a priest for appearing without his Roman collar. Today, we might find ourselves scandalised because someone goes to communion having had a huge meal well within the designated one hour of fasting or even for eating meat on Friday, even though the ‘law’ does not require it. (Most of the passages in the Gospel attacking Pharisees are really directed against Pharisees in our Christian communities, not to mention the Pharisee in our own hearts.)

Elsewhere, Jesus has told us not to judge because it is very difficult for us to know what is going on within another person’s mind. (Like a former professor of mine, who as a young man, many years ago, was seen going into a shop to buy a packet of condoms. He actually wanted them to keep the rain off the spark plugs on his ancient motorbike!)

What Jesus is really emphasising here is the inner spirit and motivation. Once that is right, everything else will be taken care of.

Week 28 | Wednesday

Readings | Romans 2:1-11; Luke 11:42-46

FIRST READING (Romans 2:1-11)

Paul now turns his attention to his fellow-Jews, although he does not mention them by name.

In this section Paul sets forth principles that govern God’s judgment. God judges (1) according to truth, (2) according to deeds, and (3) according to the light a person has.

“No matter who you are, if you pass judgement you have no excuse. You condemn yourself when you condemn others, because you are behaving in the same way as those you are condemning.” Paul himself is aware, as he condemns others, that he is condemning himself if he behaves in the way they do.”We are well aware that people who behave like that are justly condemned by God.”

Nothing can take the place of personal virtue: not the Law, not circumcision, not even the Scriptures. The Jew and the Gentile will be judged individually by God, since all are equally liable to sin. His teaching about judging is the same as that of Jesus, who did not condemn judging as such but hypocritical judging or doing so behind people’s backs in a condemnatory way.

Paul’s warning had had special relevance for Jews, who were inclined to look down on Gentiles because of their ignorance of God’s revelation in the Old Testament and because of their immoral lives. In fact, as we Christians need also to remember, greater knowledge brings greater responsibility and liability.

“When you judge those who behave in this way while doing the same thing yourselves, do you think you can escape God’s condemnation?” Jesus also had said, “Do not judge and you will not be judged” and spoke about seeing the speck of dust in a brother’s eye while ignoring the large piece of wood in one’s own. (Isn’t it like that most of the time with us too?)

Instead, Paul says they if they were more aware of God’s “abundant goodness, tolerance and patience” with them it would rather lead them to ask forgiveness for their own sins. The Jews sometimes had misconstrued God’s patience to be a lack of intent to pass judgement. Their refusal to repent of their own sins is only piling up punishment for themselves on the “Day of Retribution”, when God’s just verdict will be given.

For “he will repay everyone as their deeds deserve.” On this sentence the Jerusalem Bible expands:

The prophecy of ‘a day of Yahweh’ which will be a day of anger and salvation, will be fulfilled eschatologically in the ‘day of the Lord’ when Christ returns in glory. On this ‘day of judgment’ the dead man will rise again and the whole human race will be judged in God’s court and in Christ’s. This trial is inescapable and impartial; it is conducted by God. Through Christ God will judge ‘the living and the dead’. He examines the heart and his trial is by fire; he will treat everyone according to his works. What has sown will be reaped. Angrily he will destroy evil powers and evil people. But for the chosen, i. e. those who have been good, there will be freedom, rest, reward, salvation, honour, praise, and glory. (Jerusalem Bible, text references omitted)

Therefore, “for those who aimed for glory and honour and immortality by persevering in doing good, there will be eternal life but for those who out of jealousy have taken for their guide not truth but injustice, there will be the fury of retribution.” This “doing good”, of course, presumes that all we do is done with the power of God in us. There is nothing we can do by ourselves to “earn” salvation. Our good actions are the result of our saying ‘Yes’ to God in faith.

On the other hand, “trouble and distress will come to every human being who does evil - Jews first, but Greeks as well”. With spiritual privilege and insight comes greater spiritual responsibility. Similarly, “glory and honour and peace will come to everyone who does good - Jews first, but Greeks as well”.

In short, “there is no favouritism with God”.

These words are both a consolation and a warning to us also. A warning because, as Christians, we cannot expect to get special treatment when we misbehave. On the contrary, given all the helps we have received and continue to receive, even more is expected of us. (We remember what happened to the man who hid his ‘talent’ in the ground.) A consolation because we know that God treats every single person with absolute impartiality and justice. He reaches out exactly the same love to every single person.

We also know that he is a God rich in compassion and slow to anger. As a first step, it is important then for us to have some of that quality in ourselves and be less hasty in passing judgment on others, especially “outsiders”.

GOSPEL (Luke 11:42-46)

Jesus today continues to attack the attitudes of Pharisees. These remarks are not to be thought of as applying to all Pharisees, many of whom were good people. Paul himself was once a Pharisee as was Nicodemus, who came to Jesus by night, and Gamaliel, who, in the Acts (5:34ff), urged caution in persecuting the disciples of Jesus. Jesus is to be seen rather attacking a certain mentality which can all too easily be among us Christians and, if we are honest, sometimes in ourselves.

Here Jesus attacks them for their scrupulous observance of even the tiniest of regulations, not because that is wrong but because they by-pass the love of God which is what really matters. He attacks them for their status-seeking. They expect people to look up to them and give them special honours because of their supposed higher level of religious observance. They expect to be given front seats in the synagogue and for people to greet them obsequiously in the streets.

Usually graves were whitewashed so that people would not walk over them by mistake. The Pharisees are like unmarked graves which people unwittingly come in contact with and thus become tainted with ritual uncleanness. In other words, people coming in contact with them are not aware that under the veneer of piety inside they are really containers of rottenness and corruption. (Elsewhere, Jesus describes them as whitewashed graves where the outer cleanliness conceals inner corruption.)

In the past (and perhaps in some places it is still the case), the clergy have often expected similar honours to be paid to them. Very often, people willingly did so because they genuinely respected their bishop or their priest. But there were cases where the honours were not deserved but were demanded and expected. But, as used to be said, the habit does not make the monk nor the Roman collar the priest nor the mitre the bishop.

At this point, one of the scribes or experts in the law objected because in speaking like that about the Pharisees, Jesus was attacking them too. (Some of the scribes were also Pharisees.) But they are equally deserving of criticism. Because by their narrow-minded and nit-picking interpretations of the law they make it difficult for ordinary people to keep the law, while they themselves do nothing to help. Moreover, they add rules and regulations to the Mosaic Law, do nothing to help people keep them and find ways for themselves to get around them.

The Church itself over the centuries has not been above criticism in this area either. And perhaps it is still true today. Bishops and priests have often laid heavy burdens on the faithful and not given much help in carrying them. Sometimes church leaders have been more anxious to preserve traditional practices than lead people to a deeper love of Christ and each other.

But the clergy have no monopoly on this. Parents too can be guilty when they follow double standards, making one rule for themselves and another for their children. Similarly teachers with students or employers with employees. . .”Do as I say; don’t do as I do”, as teacher Miss Jean Brodie tells her students in Muriel Sparks’ novel.

Pharisaism is alive and well in our society but the first person I need to check is me.

Week 28 | Thursday

Readings | Romans 3:21-29; Luke 11:47-54

FIRST READING (Romans 3:21-29)

In this beautiful passage we come to the very heart of Paul’s letter.

Here, as in the letter to the Galatians, Paul discusses how a person “becomes right” or is “justified” in God’s eyes. Salvation comes through faith in Christ.

In order to understand what Paul is saying we need to remember the context in which he spoke. In some of the Christian communities there were Jewish Christians who were agitating for the return of the Mosaic Law as the basis for a life in and with God. They were urging that every Christian, including Gentiles, be circumcised. Paul, himself a circumcised Jew and formerly a Pharisee, is totally opposed to this movement.

He begins by conceding that “God’s saving justice” was formerly made known through the Law and the Prophets, in other words, through the whole Jewish tradition of the Old Testament. But now, with the coming of Jesus Christ, God’s “saving justice” is to be seen in a completely new light and no longer dependent on the Law. That “saving justice” is now given through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe in him as Lord and Saviour sent by the Father. ‘Justice’ or ‘righteousness’ here refers to God’s inherent goodness and infinite loved extended to every single human being. We are ‘just’ when we are totally in harmony with God’s justice.

Formerly, the Jews regarded themselves as on a different level before God because of the Law but now “no distinction is made: all have sinned and lack God’s glory”. All lack God’s “glory” in the Old Testament sense, that is to say, God as present to human beings and communicating himself to them more and more, a process that can reach its climax only in the messianic era.

Then comes the key sentence in the passage: “All [Jews and Gentiles alike] are justified by the free gift of his grace through being set free in Christ Jesus.” So much theological blood has been spilt over this one sentence! For our purposes we will try to keep it simple. The key words are ‘justified’ and ‘grace’ and ‘set free’.

For ‘justified’ others like to translate ‘made righteous’. In either case, we are speaking of being put in a state of total harmony with God, the opposite of the alienation that comes from sin.

And this happens by the “free gift of God’s grace”. * The Greek word translated as ‘grace’ is charis (caris). Basically, the word means something which is given free and unearned or unmerited and this is the meaning which predominates in the New Testament. Paul uses the word to describe the way God saves us through Jesus - it is a work of spontaneous love to which none of us has any claim. It is interesting that John uses the word agape (‘agaph) in the same sense. Agape is the love that pours out from God on to all his creation and it is the love that we are called on to pass on to others.”Love consists in this: not that we have loved God but that he has loved us and has sent this Son as an offering for our sin” (1 John 4:10) - exactly the same as Paul is saying to the Romans.

It was, then, an act of ‘grace’, an act of love emanating totally and only from God, for Jesus to come on earth, to suffer and die, for his Father to give him up as a gift to us.”He did not spare his own Son.” And with the gift of Jesus’ redemptive act come all other divine favours: our being justified and saved, ‘put right’ with God, the harmony of the ‘original blessing’ once more fully restored and then, with all this, the right to inherit life without end.

The only condition on our part is our surrendering to him in total faith and trust, without having to perform the works of the Law. Salvation, then, is total gift and there is nothing we can do of our own which will ‘earn’ it. God is never, ever in our debt. (We see this in the scene of the two men praying in the Temple. The tax collector is bowed humbly at the back begging God’s forgiveness for his many sins; the Pharisee stands up in front and tells God how good he has been in his keeping of the Law with the implication that God is obliged to reward him accordingly. It was the tax collector who went away ‘justified’, cf. Luke 18:9-14.)

So Paul says: “God appointed Christ as a sacrifice for reconciliation, through faith, by shedding his blood, and so showed his justness [that is, his total union with the Father]; first for the past, when sins went unpunished because he held his hand.” On the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur), the ‘throne of mercy’ was sprinkled with the blood of a sacrificed goat. But now the blood of Christ has done what the ancient ritual could only symbolise - purification from sin.

For many past sins, God “held his hand”, that is, he declined to attach guilt but this only makes sense if total forgiveness and reconciliation were to follow and the complete destruction of man’s sin by justification through the saving death of Christ.

And the same applies “now again for the present age” to show how God is just and makes just everyone who has faith in Jesus as Lord and Saviour.

“What then” asks Paul, “becomes of our boasts? There is no room for them.” He is clearly addressing those Jews in the community who are going back to the observance of the Law as the way to God. The word Paul uses here expresses the attitude of one who boasts of his own achievements, relies on them, and claims to accomplish his supernatural destiny by his own strength. This attitude is ruled out, since one does not win God’s acquittal by superior strength, one receives it as a gift. The act of faith excludes self-sufficiency because in it human beings explicitly attest their radical insufficiency.

He asks: “On what principle are these people operating - that only actions count?” “No!” says Paul, faith in Christ is what counts. And he repeats what he has already said: “A person is justified by faith and not by doing what the Law tells him to do.” And that ‘person’ is any person.”Do you think God is the God only of the Jews, and not of the Gentiles too? Most certainly of Gentiles too.” There were those who believed that only the Jews were God’s Chosen People and that salvation for the Gentiles was out of the question. (Remember the story of Jonah we had recently?)

Summing up, then, it is the ‘law’ of faith, that total giving and surrendering of the self to God in Christ, that saves and not the Law of works. Salvation is not based on self-initiated acts but by entering into an intimate relationship with a God who reaches out in love (agape) to me and calls me to share his life. That reaching out in spontaneous love is called here ‘grace’. My good works are not the down payment by which I ‘buy’ salvation; rather they are the sign of God’s love working in and through me.

(In the scene where the ‘sinful’ woman comes into the house of Simon the Pharisee and pours precious ointment over Jesus’ feet and kisses him passionately, Jesus says, in reply to the scandalised Simon, “She loves much because her sins have been forgiven.” Jesus does not say, “Her sins have been forgiven because she loves much.” cf. Luke 7:36-50)

It was around some of these ideas that Martin Luther built his theology which caused him to “protest” and separate from the Church.

There are two extremes we have to avoid. One is the idea that we “get to heaven” simply by the good works we do, by “keeping the Commandments” so that God owes us salvation, like a worker earns his wages. This idea, which was proposed by a gentleman called Pelagius, was rejected centuries ago by the Church and came to be known as the “Pelagian heresy”. Subconsciously, it seems to be still around.

The other extreme is one hears from some non-Catholic Christians which gives the impression that all one needs is to “call on the name of Jesus” and one will be saved. Good works become totally irrelevant. But good works are not at all irrelevant. While good works cannot be totally initiated by us, still good works are the sign of God’s grace-love at work in us.”Faith without good works is dead” as the Letter of James tells us.

God does not love me because I am good; I am good because I allow God’s love to work in and through me. It is by my faith and openness to Jesus that this becomes possible. One would have to have serious doubts about Christians who claim to have “faith in Christ” but show nothing of the Gospel spirit in their behaviour.

The more extreme form of “justification by faith” tends to see no goodness at all possible in our behaviour. We are irrevocably sinful and it is only the blood of Christ “covering over our sins” which makes access to God possible. The Christian becomes a kind of two-tier person: on top there is this calling on Christ as Saviour but below there is a person irrevocably steeped in sin.

This really was Luther’s solution to his own very scrupulous conscience, overwhelmed and riddled with guilt. He felt that God could never forgive his sins. The only answer was for Jesus the Redeemer to turn a blind eye to them. The person is saved in spite of his sinfulness. The Catholic position would be that, while faith is essential to win God’s grace, real interior transformation can and does take place.

The former position has lead to a Christian life which makes little accommodation for what we would call an “interior” life. Classical Protestantism speaks little of spirituality; it has dropped what we call the “religious life” of the monk, friar, nun. It does not include schools of prayer and contemplation; or the making of retreats. It rules out the presence of saints and so, many Protestant churches indeed do not recognise saints. Yet experience makes it difficult to believe that there are not people whose lives are deeply penetrated by the Spirit of Christ, the people we know as saints, canonised or not. In spite of what some Protestants profess, they often put to shame many of us Catholics by the love and care they show for the poor and the needy.

Another area where some forms of extreme Protestantism seem to be absent is in concern for the bringing about of the Kingdom on earth, the struggle for justice, freedom and peace. The focus seems rather on personal salvation and the leading of others to a similar concern. Everyone who is not calling on Christ in faith is irrevocably lost. We cannot accept such an interpretation of Paul.

With this there will also be the exclusion of what Karl Rahner called the “anonymous Christian” or what could be called the “Kingdom person”, that is, someone who, though not aware of the Christian message, leads a life which reflects the deepest attitudes of truth, love, justice, community sharing, the dignity and equality of every individual - the values for which Jesus lived and died. Examples of such people would be Mahatma Gandhi and the Dalai Lama among many others.

However, it is gratifying to know that in recent times Catholics and Lutherans (as well as other Protestant groups) have come together in dialogue and, freed from the polemics of an earlier time, have learnt that there is really not so much disagreement over the understanding of Paul’s words. Many sister churches, too, have been taking back some of the features of the Roman church which they realise were a loss to their living of the Christian life.

On our part, we Catholics are getting a richer concept of faith which, in the past, was often identified with the intellectual acceptance of the Church’s doctrines and an obsession with orthodoxy as the test of a “good” Catholic. We are becoming more aware that faith as trust and surrender to a loving Christ is so important.

* The Jerusalem Bible has a long note on the understanding of ‘grace’ in the Scriptures. It is appended at the end of this week’s readings.

GOSPEL (Luke 11:47-54)

More strong words from Jesus against the Pharisaic mentality. Today the charge is of hypocrisy.

They now build monuments to remember the prophets of old but those same prophets were killed by the ancestors of those who later built them. On the one side they are building the monuments as an act of atonement while they themselves have exactly the same attitudes as their ancestors. They do not listen to their own teaching.

Jesus utters words which he identifies as “the wisdom of God”: “I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of these they will persecute and kill.” It is not a quotation from the Old Testament or any other book known to us. It could refer to God speaking through Jesus (the Word, the Wisdom of God) or presenting in quotation form God’s decision to send prophets and apostles, even though they would be rejected.

Jesus is basically saying that the mission of the Church (apostles) is linked with the mission of the Old Testament prophets, who, like Jesus’ disciples, suffered and, in some cases, died at the hands of their contemporaries. Jesus, of course, himself will be one of them, the last and greatest Prophet.

Jesus says the scholars of the Law carry with them guilt for the killing of every good person and every prophet since the murder of Abel down to that of Zechariah. The murder of Abel by his brother Cain is recorded in Genesis 4:8, the opening book of the Old Testament, and that of Zechariah, son of Jehoiada in 2 Chronicles 24:20-22, a book regarded as the closing of the Hebrew Testament by the Jews. It is like our describing the whole Bible in terms of “from Genesis to Revelation”. Jesus was referring to the history of martyrdom right through the whole of the Old Testament.

There is one final attack against the Scribes and their way of thinking and acting. They interpret the Law in such a way that they make it inaccessible to the ordinary person. And, what is worse, they do not observe it themselves.”You yourselves have not gained access, yet you have stopped those who wish to enter!” They kept both themselves and the people in ignorance of the true way to salvation and wholeness. As it is put in Matthew’s gospel: “They shut the kingdom of heaven [God] in people’s faces” (Matt 23:13).

One wonders how many of our Church leaders, teachers and theological and moral ‘experts’ have not done exactly the same thing over the years and down to the present day? How many Catholic parents and teachers have made the Christian message basically inaccessible to the young and then we wonder why they have “no interest in religion”?

Not surprisingly, all these attacks only increased the hostility of the Pharisees and the religious leaders against Jesus. They got him to speak on a multitude of religious questions hoping that he would convict himself out of his own mouth. As far as they were concerned, they were more than successful. What they did not realise was that Jesus was operating from a completely different vision of what life is really about. His new wine could not fit into their old wineskins.

The question for each one to ask is: Do I share the vision of Jesus? What does ‘Christianity’ mean to me?

Week 28 | Friday

Readings | Romans 4:1-8; Luke 12:1-7

FIRST READING (Romans 4:1-8)

Paul continues his theme about the gratuitousness of Gods love and salvation for us. He uses Abraham as an example.

Abraham is the father of the Jewish people, the great patriarch of the Jewish nation, the true example of a justified person but he also preceded the introduction of the Mosaic Law and knew nothing of such a law. As much of what Paul is saying is directed to his fellow-Jews his choice of Abraham, the ancestor of all God’s people is not without significance.

Could Abraham have been “made right” with God merely on the basis of what he had achieved in his lifetime? Actually, Jewish tradition, preoccupied with Abraham’s loyalty and his fortitude under trial, had made him the outstanding example of justification by works. The Jews believed his greatness was in what he achieved. Paul agrees that Abraham certainly could have grounds for making that claim. However, he asserts that this justification and these works have their source in Abraham’s faith.

And Paul believes that he has Scripture on his side. He quotes: “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as justice/uprightness” (Gen 15:6). There is no mention here of him doing anything. He was rewarded purely for his trusting faith in God. Abraham had kept no law (it did not yet exist), rendered no service and performed no regular ritual that earned credit to his account before God. It was his belief in God, who had made promises to him, which was credited to him as righteousness.

There are three ways in which the quotation can be understood:

1, Because of his faith, Abraham was regarded as an upright man, though in reality he was not. (This would seem to be Luther’s position.)

2, Because of his faith, God had conferred on him an uprightness that was not his when he came to believe (but may have come later).

3, In God’s eyes faith and uprightness are so interdependent that they are really inseparable.

Only the last of these three would seem to be consistent with Paul’s teaching. A person who has totally surrendered to Jesus and his Way in faith and trust is going to be a good and loving person, or at least, moving inevitably in that direction.

The story of Abraham gives several examples of this faith and trust. He was first asked to leave his homeland and go to a distant land where his descendants would live. He did so. Although his wife was well beyond the age for childbearing, God promised that Abraham’s descendants would be as numerous as the stars in the skies or the grains of sand on the seashore. Abraham put his trust in the Lord’s word and he did indeed have a son, Isaac.

Then, sometime later, God - incredibly - asked Abraham to sacrifice his only son, the only legitimate heir who could give him descendants, and Abraham proceeded to do the Lord’s bidding but, once his faith was proved, he was stopped at the last minute.

When a man works, says Paul, his wages are not a gift; they are his due.”But when a man does nothing, yet believes in him who justifies the sinful, his faith is credited as justice.” The man does nothing, not because he is lazy but because he knows only God can produce results. On the other hand, as we have said, the person full of faith will eo ipso be also full of good works.

Paul finishes by quoting words of David (Psalm 32) applied to a “man to whom God credits justice without requiring deeds”:

How blessed are those whose offence is forgiven,
whose sin is blotted out.
How blessed are those to whom the Lord imputes no guilt.

It is as if God no longer sees or does not want to see the bad that we have done and removes from us all guilt. But that does not mean we can just sit back and relax.”Why worry? I just have to say ‘I believe in the Lord Jesus” and God covers over all my sins.” No, on my part, I need to open my heart to that loving compassion of God that has been revealed by the pouring out of Jesus’ blood on the cross. That has to have an effect on my behaviour.

I have to say a big and unconditional ‘Yes’ to Jesus’ invitation actively to follow him, even though it will happen only with his help all the way. It will mean saying an equally big ‘No’ to many things which I know are in conflict with the Way of Jesus.

It is important to remember, too, that the root of the sin is not in the action but rather in one’s relationship with God. Once I am fully reconciled with Jesus by throwing myself at his feet in faith and sorrow, he takes me back in exactly the same way that the father of the Prodigal Son took his wayward son back. All is forgotten; healing has taken place. The relationship is fully restored even though the effects of my act may still endure. God only sees me as I am here and now. And I respond to him in faith - now.

GOSPEL (Luke 12:1-7)

After his confrontation with the Pharisees and Scribes, Jesus now turns to the crowds. We are told that they were gathering round him in their thousands, so densely that they were trampling on each other. Clearly they were hungry to hear a man who had spoken in such an extraordinary and daring ways to their religious leaders.

But Jesus begins by speaking first to his own disciples.”Be on guard against the yeast of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy.” The fermenting characteristic of yeast is seen by the Jews as a corrupting agent. That was why they only use unleavened bread at the Passover.

The corrupting agent in the Pharisees was their hypocrisy. On the outside they pretended to be what they were not on the inside.”There is nothing. . . hidden that will not be made known.” It can mean that the hypocrisy of the pharisaical will ultimately be laid bare. In contrast to the hypocrisy of the Pharisees the followers of Jesus must practice transparency. And, although much of the teaching that the disciples receive is in private, ultimately all will have to come out into the open.

The Church is not a secret society, although it has its “mysteries”, its special teachings and rituals, which are only fully understood by those who are “inside”. The Church is of its very essence evangelical. Its purpose is to share the vision of Christ with the whole world. This is crucial to the setting up of the kingdom, the accepted reign of God in the world.

“What you have whispered in locked rooms will be proclaimed from the rooftops.” This, of course, will involve dangers. The Gospel will be resisted, it will be seen as a dangerous threat to other views of life. Christians will die and, in fact, thousands have sacrificed their lives simply because they were followers of Jesus.

But death is not the worst enemy. It is a fact of living. It is an end we will all have to face one day, sooner or later, one way or the other. The one we are really to fear is the one “who has the power to cast into Gehenna after he has killed”. Only God as the Supreme Judge has this power. Of course, the only person God “casts” into “hell” is one who has chosen to separate him- or herself definitively from God.

‘Gehenna’ (in Hebrew) ge-hinnom, ‘Valley of Hinnom’ or ge-ben-hinnom, ‘Valley of the Son of Hinnom’, was situated on the south-west of Jerusalem. In the time of the kings it had been the centre of a cult in which children were sacrificed (cf. 2 Kings 23:10; Jeremiah 7:31) and hence seen as a place of abomination. The Hebrew is transliterated into Greek as gaienna, which appears in the New Testament as geenna (geenna). The punishment of sinners by fire after death first appeared in Jewish apocalyptic literature but the name geenna for this punishment first appears in the New Testament. The term is only used in Matthew, Mark, the Letter of James and here. The word is not to be confused with Hades, which was a general name for the place of the dead.

The one we are really to fear is the one who can make us deny Christ and all that Christ means and to die in a state of denial. But, whatever threats hang over us, we are not to fear. We have the example of many before us who have gone to their deaths in peace and without hesitation. They knew they had no other choice: either death or Truth.

Even little birds sold in the market place for a few cents do not die unknown to God, says Jesus. The very hairs of our head are counted. So our duty is clear: to proclaim the good news of the Gospel with openness and integrity and not to fear the consequences. Because we are not alone.

Week 28 | Saturday

FIRST READING (Romans 4:13,16-18)

Paul continues speaking of Abraham as a model of faith and trust.

The promise made to Abraham by God that “he and his descendants should inherit the world was not through the Law”. For the simple reason that the Law had not yet come into existence. It was based on the “justice” of Abraham, that is, his becoming “right” with God through his total faith and trust in the promises that had been made to him. Through his faith he was in perfect harmony and union with God.

Abraham and his descendants inheriting the “world” refers to the whole of creation. Actually, no express mention of this inheriting is made in the Genesis account of Abraham. He is promised “offspring like the dust of the earth” and possession of the land of Canaan, and that all the peoples on earth would be blessed through him or his offspring. But since, as Genesis already makes clear, God purposed through Abraham and his offspring to work out the destiny of the whole world, it was implicit in the promises to Abraham that he and his offspring would “inherit the earth”. The full realisation of this awaits the perfection of the Kingdom when Christ returns to take all things to himself.

All that we receive “depends on faith, everything is a grace”. Here we have the combination of the two interlocking key words in this Letter. All that we have is “grace”, all is total gift. Nothing we have is truly our own. But access to that grace is the openness of faith and trust - which, paradoxically, is itself a gift.

Further, says Paul, the promises made to Abraham hold true for all his descendants without exception, not only for those who have the Law (the Jews) but for all who have the faith of Abraham, who lived in faith but outside the Law (hence, all believing Gentiles).

And so as far as God is concerned, Abraham is the “father of us all”, Jews and Gentiles alike, no matter how others (especially the Jews) may see him. As God says of Abraham in Genesis (17:5): “I have made you father of many nations” - and not just of one. (The real ancestor of the Jews is Jacob, also called Israel.)

Abraham is, as the First Eucharistic Prayer says, “our father in faith”: in the double sense that he is the first of all those who come to God through faith and trust and the model and example for all to follow.

He is the God who brings the dead to life - a reference to the birth of Isaac through Abraham and Sarah. (Just below Paul says, though Abraham “was as good as dead - he was 100 years old - and Sarah’s womb was dead too, it did not shake his faith”.) He is also the God who also calls into existence what does not yet exist, as at the creation. These two reminders of God’s power prepare the reader/listener for the reference to Christ’s resurrection a little later on.

Lastly, in a marvellous phrase, Paul says that “hoping against hope, Abraham believed” that he was to become the father of many nations. In situations which seemed absolutely to rule out their fulfilment, Abraham believed that God would give him the descendants promised to him (Gen 15:5).

We too need this kind of faith. Not just the faith that accepts dogmas as true but the faith that helps us to surrender totally into the arms of our God and let him take us to himself. To let go and let God, as they say.

GOSPEL (Luke 12:8-12)

Jesus continues to prepare his disciples for trials to come in the future.

He encourages them to be faithful to their Christian commitment and to their faith in Christ as Lord. When we publicly acknowledge Jesus as Christ and Lord, Jesus too will acknowledge us as his faithful disciple. Of course, it will be difficult during times of abuse and persecution but they must always be ready to acknowledge their allegiance to Jesus. To deny that allegiance may win them a reprieve in this life but not in the next.”He who saves his life will lose it,” as Jesus said on an earlier occasion. The word for ‘deny’ here is the same word used in Peter’s denial and disowning of his Master (Luke 22:34 and 61).

There comes now a saying which can cause difficulty to some.”Anyone who speaks against the Son of Man will be forgiven but whoever blasphemes the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven.” Why should there be just one exception to the forgiveness of sin? And why is speaking against the Son acceptable but not against the Spirit?

To speak against the Son is clearly wrong but, with repentance, there can be reconciliation. But to sin against the Spirit is to go against Truth itself. This was basically the sin of the Scribes and Pharisees. They not only criticised Jesus; that could be understood. But they locked themselves into a situation where they shut out any openness to the truth, the Truth that others could so easily see present in Jesus. As long as they were in that situation, there was no possibility of reconciliation. Forgiveness in the Gospel is not just a unilateral move on one person’s part. It always involves a coming together of two opposing parties in reconciliation. To sin against the Spirit is to close the door on reconciliation.

It seems that in Luke’s context he may be applying the saying to those Christians who are under attack for their faith. If they deny the Spirit of Truth they too lock themselves out from being reached by God. In times to come, Jesus’ disciples will be dragged before civic and religious authorities. They are not to be afraid or worried about how to defend themselves or about what they should say.

People who have been in this position have attested that the words do indeed come and with them a certain peace and strength, provided one retains one’s integrity and wholeness. And it is the presence of that Spirit, the Spirit of God and of Jesus, that is at work.

Most of us will not have to suffer severely for our faith. But there will likely be times when we may find our religious beliefs and practices ridiculed and made fun of. We can be tempted at such times to go into hiding, to conceal our Christian identity. We may even fail to come to the support of people who are under attack, refuse to stand by them, refuse to stand up and be counted as committed followers of the Gospel.

If that has happened in the past, let us ask forgiveness. Let us pray that in future we may have the courage and integrity in word and deed to let people know who we are and what we stand for.

Note on ‘Grace’

Grace: this word (charis, caris) when used with reference to human relationships can mean either the quality that makes a person attractive, or it can mean thanks for a gift, or it can mean something given free and unearned. This last sense predominates in the New Testament and especially in Paul (John uses agape [’agaph]) who uses the word to describe the way God saves them through Jesus: it is a work of spontaneous love to which no one had any claim.

It was an act of ‘grace’ for Jesus to come on earth, to die, for his Father to give him up as a gift to us, a gift that includes all divine favours: justification, salvation, and the right to inherit by having faith in him without having to perform the works of the Law; it will also be an act of ‘grace’ for Christ to come again at the end of the world and for us to receive everlasting glory.

It was by grace that Abraham received the promise and that a few Israelites were chosen to survive. Since grace is God’s love for us, it is inexhaustible and it conquers sin.

The one word ‘grace’ is so useful and full of meaning that it can be used to indicate the entire messianic era that succeeds the era of the Law, the same messianic era that was once proclaimed by the prophets and is now proclaimed as the Good News.

The word sums up the gifts of God so well that Paul begins and ends his letters by wishing ‘grace’ to all his readers. It is by an act of grace that ‘the God of all grace’ calls men to salvation, loads them with all spiritual gifts, makes Paul an apostle of the pagans and assigns to each Christian the part he has to play in the life of the Church; similarly, it is a ‘grace’ to suffer for Christ.

Mary ‘found grace’ with God; Jesus himself received the ‘grace’ of the highest name of all. For human beings to be agreeable to God depends primarily on God’s initiative and secondarily on human response.

It is possible to receive grace in vain, to fall from grace, to forfeit grace, and thus to insult the Spirit of grace. Grace obtained must be carefully guarded and used wisely; it is not enough to remain in grace, it must increase, to strengthen us, and help us to persist in our good intentions. This divine help is given to the humble and is obtained by prayer, since this is to approach ‘the throne of grace’ confidently.

Grace will be granted and be found sufficient; it is the power of Christ operating in weak man, and this grace of Christ triumphs over unspiritual wisdom. The same word charis is also used for thanksgiving (e. g. as in eu-charis-tia), since gratitude to God is the fundamental and necessary disposition for grace.

From all these shades of meaning it is clear that the word charis is always used to emphasise that the gift is absolutely free; to bring out its power and its inwardness Paul also uses the word pneuma (pneuma).

- Jerusalem Bible, text references removed

Week 29 | Monday

FIRST READING (Romans 4:20-25)

Paul continues to give the example of Abraham’s faith as a model for all of us.

One might wonder why he devotes so much space to Abraham but we must remember that he was seen as the father of God’s people (including us) and that he was looked up to as a model of good behaviour which won God’s favour.

“Counting on the promise of God, he did not doubt or disbelieve, but drew strength from faith and gave glory to God, fully convinced that whatever God promised he had the power to perform.” Through his faith Abraham gave glory to God because all that happens in his life is clearly the work of God and not of a human person.

Faith truly is all-powerful; it shares in the power of God himself. When the father of the epileptic boy came to Jesus to heal his son, Jesus told him: “Everything is possible to one who believes and trusts” (Mark 9:23). Paul, too, could boast of his weaknesses because, as he said, “I can do everything in the one who gives me strength” (2 Cor 12:9-10).

And so “this is the faith that was ‘reckoned to him as uprightness’.” This kind of faith is the sign of real ‘uprightness’, real goodness. It is not the self-generated ‘goodness’ which is no real goodness at all. As Jesus told his disciples at the Last Supper, “Apart from me, you can do nothing” (John 15:5) It was this surrendering of himself, against all apparent reason, into God’s hands which was Abraham’s “justice”, that is, his being made right with God. This is not a moral rightness but a total harmony of relationships, a union of heart and mind.

And the word ‘reckoned’ in scripture applies not only to him; it is there for our sake too - our faith, too, will be ‘reckoned’. What is true of Abraham is true for every single person. Our genuine goodness will be measured by the level of our faith and trust in the God who gives us strength.

And, as Abraham was made right with God because he believed in a God who brought life from the dead, so we will be justified “because we believe in him who raised from the dead our Lord Jesus who was ‘handed over to death for our sins’ and raised to life for our justification”.

This is the source of our “justification”, our being “made right” with God - namely, that we totally give ourselves to Jesus Christ, as Lord and Saviour, who died and was raised to life so that we might share that life with him. In our case we go to God in faith through our intimate following of Jesus, joining him in suffering, death and resurrection.

God may seem at times to be calling us to the impossible. But our faith helps us to see that God works in everything and through everything. Apart from Abraham, there are many other examples in the lives of Christians, especially some of the great saints. Let us follow in their footsteps.

GOSPEL (Luke 12:13-21)

We move on now in Luke to more immediate concerns of the Christian life. Today’s topic is about the perennial question of money, or rather, the love of money.

A man in the crowd asked Jesus to tell his brother to give him a share of the inheritance due to them both. According to Mosaic Law the general rule was that an elder son received double that of a younger son. If there was a dispute, it was usually settled by a rabbi, which is presumably why the man approached Jesus. It was the kind of problem in which Jesus was not remotely interested and he refused to get involved. One wonders how interested Jesus is when we make novenas to win lotteries or when we ask God to help us get our hands on the wealth of a rich and elderly aunt!!

Jesus now takes the opportunity to make some general remarks about material greed “in all its forms”. A man may be wealthy, he says, but his possessions do not guarantee him life. Life comes with freedom, peace and happiness. Money cannot buy these things.

There is no evidence that rich people enjoy more freedom, peace or happiness although many of us are inclined to think they do and we envy them. Their marriages do not last any longer. They do not bring up better children. They do not necessarily enjoy better health.

At this point Jesus speaks a telling parable. A farmer who is already rich has a bumper harvest. It is so big that he has to pull down his existing barns to build larger ones. When all that is done, he smugly says to himself: “My boy, you have blessings in reserve for years to come. Relax! Put your feet up. Eat heartily, drink well. Enjoy yourself.” But that very night, Jesus says, God will terminate his earthly life.

What happens now to all his piled-up wealth? Yes, it all has to be left behind.”You can’t take it with you.” “How much did he leave?” was asked about a billionaire who died.”Every red cent,” was the reply. When the farmer met his God, what had he brought with him? Little or nothing. When Mother Teresa died, how much do you think she brought? One feels she brought a great deal. And she certainly left behind a great deal to enrich the lives of many.

What is my attitude to money and wealth? If I were to die now what could I bring with me to present to God? And what will I leave behind, apart from cash and possessions? All of us can be rich in God’s sight and it does not require any money. Someone has said that the really rich are not those who have the most but those whose needs are the least. [If you have a New Testament handy, read the following passage, 12:22-34, where Jesus spells out a recipe for a life free from anxiety, the life which he himself lived. ]

And what we need most is the ability to reach out in love, the love that builds and makes life better for others. Think of what good parents leave behind in children whose lives are dedicated to making this world a better place. Or teachers who have helped young people to devote themselves to service of the community.

What we need is to live in communities where people look after each other. A situation where because everyone gives, everyone gets.

Week 29 | Tuesday

FIRST READING (Romans 5:12,15,17-19,20-21)

We move on today to a different theme in this letter: the role of Jesus in our salvation from sin.

A contrast is made between Adam, our “first parent” and Christ. Adam brought sin and death into the world; Christ brought righteousness and life. These two persons also sum up the message of the Letter up to this point. Adam stands for man’s condemnation and Christ for the ‘justification’ of the believer.

“It was through one man that sin came into the world, and through sin death, and thus death has spread through the whole human race because everyone has sinned.” That man, of course, is Adam. Paul is referring, obviously, to the creation story in Genesis where the Man and the Woman, clearly disobeying the instructions they had received from God, ate the fruit (not specified as an apple!) of the tree, significantly called the “tree of the knowledge of good and evil”. Significantly, because it was only after they had eaten the fruit that they had, for the first time, a sense of evil, sin and guilt indicated by a newly-felt shame of their nakedness and their hiding from God.

Even if today we might not historically identify the “Man” and the “Woman” as actual people, they represent the whole human race. There is no doubt that through human activity sin, which is a turning away from God, came into the world and continues to flourish in all of us.

Through his disobedience, Adam, who sired every human being, infected all those descended from him with sin and hence also with death. Sin divides man from God and this separation effectively is ‘death’, a death that is spiritual and eternal, and of which physical death is the symbol.

“In Adam all have sinned.” This happened either by our sharing in the sin of Adam or else because of each one’s personal sins. There is none of us who can claim never to have sinned. We are born into an environment where sin can be found everywhere and in every person. It touches us from the moment we are born. And, through our personal sins, we join with Adam in his rebellion against God.

However, “if death came to every single person through the offence of one man, how much greater an effect the grace of God has had, coming to so many and so plentifully as a free gift through the one man Jesus Christ!” No matter how great the sin, God’s grace is infinitely greater in nullifying the effects of Adam’s sin. God’s saving love is a free gift given to all in abundance.”It was by one man’s offence that death came to reign over all, but how much greater the reign in life of those who receive the fullness of grace and the gift of saving justice through the one man, Jesus Christ.”

“One man’s offence brought condemnation on all humanity; and one man’s good act has brought justification and life to all humanity.” This is the key statement expressing the meaning of the whole passage. Condemnation came through the disobedience of one person, Adam, representing all of us, and it is the single act of one Man, Jesus Christ, who by his death and resurrection brought justification and life to all. ‘Justification’ means, as we have said, our total restoration into a life of union with God, a union which is accessed by our believing in Jesus as Lord and Saviour.

“Just as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by one man’s obedience are many to be made upright.” For this restoration of our relationship with God we do not have to wait until the Final Judgement. Being reborn in Christ is a process that continues from the moment we first begin to believe in Jesus as Lord.

So “however much sin increased, grace was always greater; so that as sin’s reign brought death, so grace was to rule through saving justice that leads to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” Nothing we have ever done and nothing we could ever do by ourselves could have undone the sin which penetrates every corner of our world and of our existence. It could only happen by the grace, the freely-given love of God, which has been poured into our hearts (as Paul says earlier in this chapter, not included in our readings).

‘Grace’ as we saw is the love of God given to us spontaneously by God without our meriting it in any way. Once we allow that love to take over our lives, its power will be greater than sin. Sin and love are totally incompatible.”Where there is love, there is God.” Where there is sin, love is absent. It is ‘grace’ too which brings that ‘saving justice’, the saving power of God which transforms our lives and is the beginning of that eternal life which Jesus our Lord wants us to share with him.

Jesus does not just “cover over” our sins. He makes it possible for our hearts to be flooded with his Spirit effecting a real inner change and the possibility of replacing sin with goodness. But it is always his work and never ours alone.

GOSPEL (Luke 12:35-38)

More advice from Jesus today about readiness. There is an echo of the parable of the wise and foolish virgins (found in Matthew’s gospel). We are to be ready, with our belts fastened and our lamps burning. Like men (not women this time) waiting for the groom to return from the wedding. When the master comes and knocks we will be ready to admit him without delay.

There is a reward, a surprising reward, for servants thus prepared. When the master comes back and finds his servant awake and ready, he will seat them at table and himself wait on them.”I have come to serve and not to be served” Jesus had said of himself. He is the one who, as Master and Lord, washes the feet of his disciples. And if the master comes in the middle of the night or before dawn, blessed are those servants who are ready for his return.

This need for readiness is not a reason to be anxious nor a reason to be afraid. Reason and experience tells us again and again that the Lord’s call comes at the most unexpected times. The only solution is to be ready here and now and leave the future to take care of itself.

In our relationships with God, it is always the present which counts. The prepared servant lives constantly in the present and seeks and finds God there. A life so lived takes care of itself - and its future.

Week 29 | Wednesday

FIRST READING (Romans 6:12-18)

Even spreading this letter over four weeks, there are many wonderful passages which have to be omitted. The only solution is to go through the whole letter ourselves in our own time.

Today we move into chapter 6. Having again spoken of the contrast between Adam and Christ and said some words about baptism, Paul goes on to say that goodness, not sin, must be in charge of our lives.

Just before this, he had told the Romans: “By dying, Christ is dead to sin once and for all, and now the life that he lives is life with God. In the same way, you must see yourselves as being dead to sin but alive for God in Christ Jesus.”

And so, Paul continues in today’s reading, “That is why you must not allow sin to reign over your mortal bodies and make you obey their desires; or give any parts of your bodies over to sin to be used as instruments of evil.” Though baptism destroys sin in us, as long we are still in this world and our body has not yet been ‘clothed with immortality’ (1 Cor 15:54), sin can still find a way to reassert itself in a ‘mortal’ body, where sensuality still has a hold.

Instead, we are to surrender ourselves totally to God, as people who have been brought to life from the death of sin. We are to offer all our human capacities - spiritual, intellectual, emotional, social - to God so that they will become instruments leading us to goodness of life.

“Then sin will no longer have any power over you - you are living not under law, but under grace.” Paul conceived of sin as a power that enslaves, and so personified it. ‘Not under the law’ means no longer under the regime of the Mosaic Law, whose external observance was the basis for the Jewish way of life. He is certainly not saying that the Christian has been freed from all moral authority. Law, by itself, provides no enablement to resist the power of sin. On the contrary, violation of the Law only increases the awareness of sin. Grace, on the other hand, enables and liberates. Its only law is the law of love (agape).

Apparently some people were countering that, if we are no longer bound by the Law but by ‘grace’, then people could do what they liked.”Out of the question!” thunders Paul. That seemed to be Luther’s position with his famous dictum of ‘Pecca fortiter’ (Sin vigorously). He seems to say that once we have committed ourselves in faith to Jesus as Lord, our sinfulness, which will inexorably continue, will be ‘over-looked’, ‘covered over’ by Christ’s grace. We saw that Luther’s interpretation of Paul was partly influenced by his own apparent impotence in overcoming his lower appetites. He needed a way to be with Christ even in his sinfulness.

However, even this is not quite the same as saying that, once we are under grace, we can throw morality to the winds, that we can do what we absolutely like with impunity. No Christian could hold that position. Where we do part company with Luther is that we are powerless to become better people, good people.

Paul, too, totally rejects the idea that, with grace, we can forget about moral behaviour. To have committed oneself to Christ totally must result in an inner transformation which steers us in the direction of goodness and love. To be in Christ is to be free, not freedom to sin but freedom not to sin. True freedom is the ability to choose the good; sin, as a choice of evil, can never be an expression of true freedom, it is an abuse of freedom.

The Jerusalem Bible comments on the freedom that comes from Christ:

Christ has freed human beings from evil so as to restore them to God. Paul develops the biblical ideas of ‘redemption’ and of liberation from death, and in order to bring out their implication makes frequent use of a metaphor that his contemporaries would find impressive: the slave redeemed and set free who can be a slave no longer but must serve his new master freely and faithfully. Christ has paid for our redemption with his life; and he has made us permanently free. The Christian must be careful not to let himself be caught again by those who once owned him, i. e. by sin; the Law, with its ritual observance; the principles of the world; and corruption. He is a free man, son of a free mother, i. e. the spiritual Jerusalem. This liberty is not licence to sin. It means serving a new master, God, the Lord Jesus Christ, to whom the Christian now belongs, for whom he lives and dies; this obedient service is prompted by faith and leads to righteousness and holiness. This is the sort of freedom a son has, one who has been one made free by ‘the law of the Spirit’, and he must be prepared to surrender it to serve his neighbour in charity and respect for someone else’s scruples require it. Slavery as a social institution may be tolerated in a society that is, after all, transient. It has no real significance in the new order established by Christ: the Christian slave has been enfranchised by the Lord Christ, and the slave and his master are equally servants of Christ. (edited and textual references omitted)

Paul then goes on to distinguish two kinds of slavery.”You know well that if you undertake to be somebody’s slave and obey him, you are the slave of him you obey: you can be the slave either of sin which leads to death, or of obedience which leads to saving justice.” To become a slave is to put oneself under the will and control of another person. To be the slave of sin can only result in death but to be truly obedient leads to life. The word ‘obedience’ contains the root of the verb ‘to hear’. To turn a deaf ear to goodness and submit to evil leads to sin and death. To listen to the voice of goodness and submit to it is the way to life.

We have a striking example in Jesus who, in obedience to his Father, offered up his whole body in life and in death for our liberation. Jesus “emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, becoming as human beings are. and he was humbler yet, even submitting to death, death on a cross” (Phil 2:7-8).

We, because of and through Christ, have exchanged one form of slavery for another.”Once you were slaves of sin, but thank God you have given whole-hearted obedience to the pattern of teaching to which you were introduced; and so, being freed from serving sin, you took uprightness as your master.” To give ‘whole-hearted’ obedience implies willing submission and not an obedience that is forced, imposed or legalistic.

Christians have changed masters. From being slaves to sin, they have become slaves to ‘righteousness’, to that inner goodness that results from opening oneself to the love of God that comes through ‘grace’. On the other hand, to be “under the law” meant finding personal salvation in obeying external rules and regulations. As we see in the case of many Pharisees, it led to arrogance and a very dangerous kind of inner corruption. A corruption which can infect us Christians too, if we are not careful.

When we surrender to a life of sin, we are headed for death. When we surrender ourselves to God it leads to justice, to goodness. Paradoxically to become the slave of “justice”, or righteousness, is to become free. Freedom, as we said, is the ability to identify totally with the good. To use one’s freedom to sin is a contradiction. And that is what true freedom enables us to do - to choose the good and loving act at all times and in every situation. Although some may not see it that way, there is no one who enjoys more real freedom than the one who is totally committed to the Way of Jesus. Because it is the Way, it is the Vision of life, to which we are called by the deepest needs of our being.

GOSPEL (Luke 12:39-48)

Today we have some further warnings on readiness. The unpredictability of God’s coming for the final call is compared to a thief breaking into one’s house. If one knew when the thief was coming, one would be prepared and have everything well locked up. Few people have not had this experience of being burgled or had their pocket picked. The point is that we do not know the day or the hour. And “the Son of Man will come when you least expect him”.

Peter asks if this image is just for the disciples or for the whole world. Jesus answers by telling a parable.

A faithful and farsighted steward is one who is found doing his job for the household whenever the master returns. The steward was one who had responsibility over the other servants and Jesus could be referring here to his apostles and other leaders of the Christian community. A trusted slave (‘servant’) too could sometimes be put in charge of an estate.

But if the steward feels that the master is “long in coming” and sets about abusing the rest of his staff and wasting his time in debauching himself, he will be severely punished when his master returns unexpectedly. We know that the early Christians believed that Jesus would return during their lifetime but, as time went on and there was no sign of Jesus, Christians could be tempted to become less vigilant and begin to ‘live it up’. It was a dangerous thing to do.

But then Jesus makes a distinction. Those who know their master’s wishes (like his disciples) but are found misbehaving when he returns will be severely punished. Those who do not know (non-disciples, outsiders) will still be punished for doing wrong but their punishment will be less than those who have received their master’s teaching and instructions.

“When much has been given to a person, much will be required; more will be asked of the one to whom more has been entrusted.”

Which means that we, as Christians, with the guidance of the Scriptures and the teaching of the Church, bear far greater responsibilities for the wrongs we do than others, such as non-Christians or non-religious people, who have less guidance. Within the Church, too, there are people who are better formed and better informed and they, too, bear greater responsibility before God.

At the same time, it might be worth pointing out that those who could avail of such formation and information and fail to do so may be also liable to greater accountability. We need to distinguish between nescience and ignorance. Nescience is simply not knowing or not being aware of some truth or value. Ignorance is not knowing what I ought to know and have every opportunity of coming to know.

Ignorance may sometimes be bliss but not where knowing Jesus and the Gospel is concerned. And wisdom, far from being folly, is a gift to be treasured.

Week 29 | Thursday

FIRST READING (Romans 6:19-23)

Today’s reading is an immediate continuation of yesterday’s and more or less repeats what was said then. Paul continues today the imagery of slavery and urges the Romans to switch from one kind to another.

He knows how morally weak they are so he expresses himself in human terms which he knows are not a perfect analogy. As once they surrendered to the slavery of immorality and a lawlessness that only results in even more lawlessness, they now have to become the slaves of good behaviour which will result in their becoming more holy, more in the image of their God and Saviour. He realises there is some difficulty using the word ‘slave’ of Christians who are essentially free in Christ. Nor is he implying that in becoming slaves of immorality they are not responsible for the choices they make, any more than in submitting themselves totally to goodness in Christ.

When they lived a life of sin, what did they really gain? All they got were experiences of which they are now deeply ashamed because, with Christ in their lives, they know that kind of sinful behaviour only brings death, spiritual death.

He now switches the image somewhat. From being enslaved to sin and liberated in Christ, he speaks of them being now liberated from sin and enslaved to the service of God. But this enslavement, which is a commitment to the good, will bring about their sanctification and will terminate in life without end (another paradox).

Slavery to God produces holiness, and the end of the process is life without end. There is no eternal life without holiness. Those who have been ‘justified’ will surely give evidence of that fact by the presence of holiness in their life. As has been said already, anyone who is truly ‘graced’ by the love of God must reveal that in the way they lead their lives. Jesus taught just that when he said that only a good tree can bear good fruit and vice versa. And again, that any branch that is on the Vine, which Christ is, will produce an abundance of fruit. The fruit-less branch will be cut off and thrown away.

Then in a much-quoted phrase Paul again repeats his thesis: “The wage paid by sin is death.” On the other hand, “the gift freely given by God”, his love received as ‘grace’, means “eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord”. Two kinds of ‘slavery’ are contrasted. The slavery of sin brings death as wages, sin creates a debt to death. The slavery in faith to Christ as Lord brings life as an unearned, unmerited gift, the gift of life without end.

To our modern way of thinking, slavery of any kind is not to be even considered. But slavery to God and goodness has totally different effects. It is only possible where there is total freedom, the freedom to be able to surrender oneself totally and unconditionally in the arms of the true, loving and beautiful God. No one is more alive than the one who give himself completely to God and makes God’s will entirely his own.

And, of course, Paul is perfectly right. The wages of sin is indeed to slide inexorably into a deteriorating quality, and ultimately loss, of life. The gift, the unearned and totally gratuitous gift that God offers us of his love leads to a life that knows no end. This is the true freedom which brings happiness and perfect peace.

It is for us to make the choice: to be sin’s slave or God’s.

GOSPEL (Luke 12:49-53)

We have some passionate and disturbing words from Jesus today.

First, he expresses his deep desire to cast fire on the earth. In the imagery of the Old Testament, fire is a symbol of God’s powerful presence. We remember Moses at the burning bush, the pillar of fire that accompanied the Israelites by night as they wandered through the desert to the promised land, as well as the tongues of fire that hovered over the disciples at Pentecost.

It is this Pentecostal fire that burns men’s hearts and draws them to change the direction of their lives. For Jesus’ wish to be fulfilled we have to play our part in helping to spread some of that fire of God’s love everywhere.

Second, he expresses a longing for his baptism to be accomplished. Baptism here refers to his immersion in the terrible suffering and death by which we will be liberated. In fact, the ritual of baptism where the person to be baptised was immersed in the baptismal pool was seen as a parallel to Jesus going down into death and emerging to the new life of the resurrection. Paul speaks about this.

Thirdly, Jesus says he has come not to bring peace but division on the earth. At first sight, this is a hard saying and it does not make any sense. Is Jesus not the Prince of Peace? Did Jesus not say at the Last Supper that he was giving his peace to his disciples, a peace that the world could not give and that no one could take away? Did he not say, “Come to me, all you who labour and are burdened and I will give you rest”? Was the final greeting of the Risen Christ to his disciples in the upper room not “Peace [be/is] with you”?

Yes, but he also warned his disciples that, after he was gone, they could expect a rough ride. They would be hauled before rulers and governors, they would be beaten and jailed and put to death. People would think they were doing well in ridding the world of them. In that sense, Jesus was certainly not going to bring peace.

And, by the time this gospel was written, Jesus’ prophecy had been well borne out and there was a lot more to come.

The break-up of families, father against mother, parents against children, in-laws against in-laws, were unfortunately only too common as one or more members in a family decided to follow Christ and be baptised. These must have been very painful experiences which no one wanted. Anyone who is familiar with the history of the Church in China during the Communist persecution knows how many families were torn apart by their accepting Christianity. (In the Gospel, we see it in the story of the blind man who attached himself to Jesus and whose parents, terrified of the authorities, wanted to have nothing to do with. It is surely an image which was quite familiar to converts in the early, not to mention the later, church.)

Jesus had warned that those who wanted to follow him had to be ready, if necessary, to leave home and family and enter into a new family of brothers and sisters. To follow the way of truth and love, of freedom and justice is always going to arouse the hostility of those who feel threatened by goodness.

But is it right to break up one’s family? We might counter by asking which is the more loving thing to do: to be true to one’s convictions and one’s integrity or to compromise them for the sake of a merely external peace? The one who leaves a family for the sake of Christ and the Gospel shows a greater love for one’s family and will never cease to love them no matter how viciously they may react to the choice the Christian has felt it necessary to make. In the long run, truth and love will prevail. They must.

Finally, hostility, division, persecution, provided the Christian is not directly responsible, does not take away the peace that Jesus spoke about. On the contrary, it is only by being true to one’s convictions and one’s integrity, whatever the price that has to be paid, that peace can be experienced.

Week 29 | Friday

FIRST READING (Romans 7:18-25)

Paul today describes an experience which all of us have had. He senses the tendencies to wrongdoing in himself which are at variance with a desire to do what is good and right. As Jesus said of his disciples during the Passion, the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak.

Paul is speaking of someone still under the empire of sin and not yet justified by Christ’s grace, whereas in chap. 8 he speaks in the name of the justified Christian with the gift of the Spirit who, nevertheless, is still aware of an inward struggle while on earth.

So the person who does not yet experience the justifying grace of God recognises a rift between his rational desire for the goodness proposed by the law and his actual performance contrary to the law. There is a radical opposition between the two. While still under the law he is unable to free himself from the slavery of sin and the power of death; he can only be rescued from defeat by the power of God’s grace working in him through Jesus Christ. A grace that comes through the act of faith made in Jesus as Lord.

“I know of nothing good living in me - in my natural self, that is - for though the will to do what is good is in me, the power to do it is not: the good thing I want to do, I never do; the evil thing which I do not want - that is what I do.” How often have we not had a similar experience? However, Paul is not saying that there is no goodness at all in each one of us. But the goodness we do have so often seems incapable of dealing with the urge to do what is wrong.

And, yet, when Paul does something that he does not really want to do, he senses that it is not his real self but the sinful urge that lives within. Here again, he is not denying his personal responsibility for what he does; in fact, he is affirming it. He does something which is in conflict with his deepest self.

And so this is his constant experience: even when he wants to do nothing but good, the evil choice is always close at hand.

“In my inmost self I dearly love God’s law, but I see that acting on my body there is a different law which battles against the law in my mind. So I am brought to be a prisoner of that law of sin which lives inside my body.” There is a war going on between his inmost, rational self and his sensual, pleasure-seeking body. The rational self is the one which dearly loves God’s law; that law is imprinted on our minds - we all have an innate hunger for truth and goodness. The sensual, pleasure-seeking self wants to by-pass the law of truth and goodness and tries to convince the self that in pleasure and sensuality there is goodness. (In fact, we never choose anything except under some guise of goodness or attractiveness, however distorted.)

In this terrible impasse, Paul cries out for help: “What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body doomed to death?” He knows that by himself there is nothing he can do. But he knows where the answer is.”God - thanks be to him - through Jesus Christ our Lord.” That is where his delivery is to be found.

On Paul’s view of the relationship of the human body with Christ the Jerusalem Bible makes the following comment:

Paul is concerned with the body and its component members, that is to say with the human being as he actually is, a sentient creature, with a sexual life, because it is in the body that man lives morally and religiously. The body, though tyrannised by the ‘flesh’, by death, and therefore a ‘body of flesh’, a ‘body of sin’, and ‘a body of death’, is not however doomed to perish, as Greek philosophy would have it, but, in accordance with the biblical tradition, destined to live, through resurrection. The principle of this renewal is the Spirit, which takes the place of the psyche, and transforms the body of the Christian into the likeness of the risen body of Christ. Until this ultimate deliverance takes place, the body of the Christian, provisionally delivered from the ‘flesh’ by its union with Christ’s death, is even now the home of the Holy Spirit, who produces in it a new life of righteousness and holiness, which is meritorious, and gives glory to God.

And Paul concludes: “So it is that I myself with my mind obey the law of God, but in my disordered nature I obey the law of sin.”

On our own, we can never win this war. But, with Christ’s help, which can come directly but also in a very special way through the support of a Christ-centred community, I can grow in freedom and overcome these irrational and destructive instincts. In their place, the values of the Gospel become more and more a reality in my daily living. In the end, I may be able to say with Paul, “I am alive, no, it is not I but Christ living in me” (Gal 2:20).

That is the meaning and the goal of our being baptised into Christ.

GOSPEL (Luke 12:54-59)

Here we have two inter-related pieces of advice from Jesus. It is striking how simple and down to earth are the examples which Jesus uses to illustrate his teaching.

Today he takes the common phenomenon of the farmer reading the sky to forecast the weather. With experience, one can become very accurate at least in short-term forecasting from observing the colour and shape of the clouds, the direction and strength of the wind and so on. The wind from the west came from the Mediterranean and so brought rain. The south wind blew from the desert and so brought hot weather.

Jesus asks his listeners, if they are so good at reading the weather signs why are they not equally good at reading the signs that are taking place before their very eyes? They were now in the messianic age. Jesus has been performing one sign after another through the power of his teaching and the authority that he brings, through the healing of the sick, the feeding of the hungry, the calming of storms, the liberating of people from evil forces.

Yet, they do not seem to be able to see the clear hand of God in what he does. They follow him with curiosity to see what they may be able to get for themselves but very few commit themselves to following him as disciples.

Secondly, he asks them why they do not judge for themselves what is right? He urges them to solve issues here and now instead of dragging their opponents to court only to find they lose the case and end up in jail.

If that is wise advice in everyday life how much more important to be ready when we come to face the Judge of judges? If we do not settle our affairs now, in the future it may be too late. Linking this with what has already been said, it is time for us to read the clear signs of God’s call coming through Jesus and to respond by a change of heart and behaviour (metanoia). Then, with no evidence to incriminate us, we will have nothing to fear from the Judge on that day of reckoning and accounting.

Bringing all this down to a more earthly level we might say that in our own time we live in an age which is becoming litigation-crazy. In many situations, both sides often end up the losers (while lawyers laugh all the way to the bank.) The bitter aftermath can last for years.

There may be times when recourse to a court is the only way to see justice done, but very often, disputes are best worked out between the parties involved. For many, the pain of marriage breakdowns can be vastly increased by litigation and can be a source of long-lasting bitterness, especially where the arguments are over large - or even small - amounts of property.

As Christians, we need to develop a real sense of justice in the sense of wanting the best for all concerned. Forgiveness and reconciliation should be a high priority for us. There should be no place in our lives for sheer vindictiveness or, perhaps worse, simply a desire to make a lot of money.

Week 29 | Saturday

FIRST READING (Romans 8:1-11)

Paul continues to discuss the conflicting forces that we find in ourselves - that of the “flesh” and that of the Spirit of Jesus Christ.

“Condemnation will never come to those who are in Christ Jesus, because the law of the Spirit which gives life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and death.” Those who are truly in Christ Jesus, not just nominally by saying so but in a way that influences their behaviour, can never be under condemnation. The law of Christ’s Spirit is life-giving. When one lives under the “law of sin and death” one is living under a system that sees sin everywhere, that focuses on punishment for every violation, irrespective of motive.

“What the Law could not do because of the weakness of human nature, God did, sending his own Son in the same human nature as any sinner to be a sacrifice for sin, and condemning sin in that human nature.” All the Law could do was to demand external observance of its stipulations. This was not life-giving; in fact, it could have the opposite effect. It could not be an inward source of salvation and wholeness.

The Law was powerless because it depended solely on one’s own efforts to observe it. As we can see in the case of the Pharisee, it could lead to a superficial and external “holiness” which only concealed the corrupt influences of the flesh actively at work. Jesus spoke cuttingly of “whitened sepulchres” - bright and clean on the outside and full of corruption within.

Christ the Son of God, however, was sent by the Father and took on exactly the same human nature as every sinner so that he might, as one of us, sacrifice himself in love for us and thus remove the sin and alienation from our human nature. God became Man that man might share in the divine life. That is what we mean by calling Jesus the Mediator, the ‘Pontifex’ (bridge-builder); he linked together what had become broken by the sin of Adam. Man, formerly carnal, is now, through union with Christ, spiritual, sharing in the Spirit of Christ.

Now, in Christ, we can fulfil the Law’s requirements “as we direct our lives not by our natural inclinations but by the spirit”. God’s aim in sending his Son was that believers might be enabled to embody the true and full intentions of the law. And, in Christ, the Law can be summed up in one single sentence: “Love one another as I have loved you” (John 13:34; cf. also Gal 5:14). In keeping that commandment, everything else is taken care of. (We might note that God is not mentioned in this commandment but that is the point; the only way I can effectively love God is by loving him in and through those around me.)

People then can be divided into two kinds: those who live according to the “flesh” and those who live according to the Spirit.”Those who are living by their natural inclinations have their minds on the things human nature desires; those who live in the spirit have their minds on things of the spirit.” Those who live according to the instincts of sinful human nature look forward to nothing but death, a disordered human nature opposed to God, because it does not and cannot submit to God’s law and so can never please God, while those who are in the Spirit can look forward to life and peace.

The Roman Christians, however, are not living by their natural inclinations but in the Spirit, who has made his home in them.”In fact, whoever does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him.”

And “when Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin but the spirit is alive because you have been justified.” Even the body of a Christian is subject to physical death, seen as the consequence of sin (death came with the sin in the Garden, just as life comes from him who rose to life in a garden, cf. John 19:41; 20:8-9,15). But, because of being ‘justified’ by the grace that comes from faith in Christ, the Christian’s spirit is alive with an unending life. The body is doomed to physical death and can be the instrument of spiritual death also; but the Spirit is life, a power of resurrection.

However, if the Spirit who raised Jesus from the dead makes his home in each one of us, the God who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will give life to our mortal bodies through the same Spirit living in us. The final resurrection of the Christian, spirit and body, is intimately dependent on that of Christ. It is by the same power and the same gift of the Spirit, that the Father will raise them to life in their turn. This operation is already being prepared: a new life is making the Christians into sons in the likeness of the Son himself, and they are being incorporated into the risen Christ by faith and baptism.

It is important to note that “flesh” in this passage means much more than the body. The body in itself is not bad, as some philosophers in Paul’s time maintained. For us, the body has been sanctified by the Incarnation, when God’s Son took on a human body and redeemed us through it.”Flesh” refers to what we might call today our “lower instincts”, the tendency, sometimes seemingly irresistible, which we have to follow urges which are selfish and self-centred, which want to satisfy our appetites, be they for food, for sex, for possessions, for anger, revenge, jealousy, violence. . . Left to ourselves we are likely to follow these instincts, often mistakenly thinking that our happiness lies there. But total indulgence in any or all of these leads only to personal degradation and self-destruction.

All that Paul says we can verify by our own experience. When we let our lower instincts guide us we know that, although there may be temporary pleasure and satisfaction, they are dragging us down, spoiling both our inner peace and the quality of our relationship with others not to mention distancing us from God. It is difficult, if not impossible, to lead that kind of life and be people of prayer.

On the other hand, when we - however patchily we do so - really try to live out the Gospel spirit in our relationships with ourselves, with others and with God, we know that we experience a deep-down satisfaction which increases our sense of freedom and peace.

The chances are that most of us are not altogether in the flesh or altogether in the Spirit but somewhere in between. Some are more in the flesh and give the odd salute to the Spirit, e. g. by doing the absolute minimum that their “religious obligations” require. Others are trying to live fully in the Spirit but know that, from time to time, the flesh asserts itself. That is no great harm. It helps us to realise that we do not make much progress without God’s help.”Without me, you can do nothing” (John 15:5)

But, if we keep at it, that is, if we keep ourselves open to the influence of the Spirit, we will experience that the power of the Spirit does become dominant and living in the Spirit becomes easier and the seductions of the flesh become easier to resist. To do this, though, we do need to keep in contact with the ways in which the Spirit comes to us: e. g. through our participation in the life of the Christian community, its prayer life, its evangelising life, its sharing of its resources with those in need, its sacramental life and its constant listening to the Word.

These are the essential channels by which the Spirit flows into our hearts and help us to live in Christ.

GOSPEL (Luke 13:1-9)

Catastrophes or accidents which take people’s lives constantly force people to ask, Why? or Why them? Why was President Kennedy shot in the prime of his career? Why did Princess Diana die so tragically at the age of 36? Why was Gandhi killed just when his country needed him most? Why did that young mother die giving birth to her child? Why did that young father die of cancer and leave behind a family struggling to survive? Why did my father die at the age of 66 while my mother lived to be 92?

Today Jesus mentions two apparently recent incidents in which lives were lost. In one case, Pilate the Roman governor had some Galileans killed in the Temple precincts. Perhaps the Galileans had violated some Roman regulation about public order. In the other, eighteen people were killed when a tower in Siloam, inside the south-east section of Jerusalem’s wall, fell on top of them. There is no other record in history of either of these two events. However, the first is regarded as typical of Pilate’s administration. The New American Bible carries the following note:

The slaughter of the Galileans by Pilate is unknown outside Luke; but from what is known about Pilate from the Jewish historian Josephus, such a slaughter would be in keeping with the character of Pilate. Josephus reports that Pilate had disrupted a religious gathering of the Samaritans on Mt. Gerizim with a slaughter of the participants (Antiquities 18,4,1 **86-87) and that on another occasion Pilate had killed many Jews who had opposed him, when he appropriated money from the temple treasury to build an aqueduct in Jerusalem (Jewish War, 2,9,4 **175-177; Antiquities 18,3,2 **60-62).

It seems that some people at the time were saying that this was a punishment of God on these people for moral wrongs they had done. Jesus disagrees. “Do you think they were more guilty than anyone else who lived in Jerusalem?” Jesus asks. “Certainly not!” he asserts.

In fact, he says, his hearers will all meet a similar fate unless they change their ways. The sins of the victims were not the cause of their death but they are certainly warnings to the rest of us to see if we are ready for such an eventuality. And he goes on to illustrate his meaning with a parable.

A man had a fig tree in his garden which did not produce fruit. Eventually he told the gardener to cut the tree down because it had not given fruit for three years in a row and it was only taking up space. However, the gardener urged that the tree be left for one more year and be given one more chance. In the meantime, he would hoe the ground and add fertiliser. If, after those efforts, there was still no fruit, let it be cut down.

The story can be linked to what Jesus has just said. In a sense the people he has been talking to are like fig trees that have not borne fruit. The three years mentioned in the story may refer to the length of Jesus’ own ministry. However, they still have a chance to turn their lives around, a chance which was not given to those who had died in those two incidents.

We, too, are being given a chance - For a day? A month? Several years? We have no idea. What is clear is that there is no time to waste; we have to start today. For God, the past is not what counts or the future but only the present. As long as I am with him NOW I have nothing to worry about.

Week 30 | Monday

FIRST READING (Romans 8:12-17)

Paul continues his comparison between being “in the flesh” and being “in Christ”.

He focuses today especially on baptised Christians, to whom his letter is mainly addressed.

Paul begins by repeating what he has already said about the difference between living in the “flesh” and living in the Spirit. Now that we are in Christ, there is no obligation to be ruled by our lower human nature, our sensual selves. To live that way leads to self-destruction. On the other hand, if, by the power of the Spirit of God working in us, we can overcome the habits which originate from the body, then we will truly live. By the power of the Spirit, we can nullify the pull of our lower nature and experience life in its fullness - physical, moral, social and spiritual.

Because “all who are led, guided by the Spirit are children of God.” Actually, the Holy Spirit is much more than one who inwardly guides, he is the very principle of a truly divine life. As Paul said of himself, “The life I live now is not my own; Christ is living in me.” He emphasises elsewhere that the whole community is the Body of the Risen Christ, in whom Christ is really present.

In a general sense, of course, God is the Father of every single person, to whom he extends his love and providential care. That is what we mean when we pray ‘Our’ Father - that ‘our’ cannot exclude a single person. But, when we identify ourselves with Christ as Lord through faith and accept his Gospel as our Way then we become children in a special sense. Not children merely by accident of birth but by faith, thus setting up a special positive relationship.

And, as children, what we have received is not “the spirit of slavery to bring you back into fear”. On the contrary, “you have received the spirit of adoption, enabling us to cry out ‘Abba, Father!’” These words seem partly addressed to those Jewish Christians who want to bring back the Law as their way of life. To live under a law in this way is a kind of slavery and it engenders fear, an ongoing anxiety that the law is not being perfectly observed.

On the contrary, through faith, we have been adopted into the family of Christ, who is our Brother, with God as our Father. Adoption was common among the Greeks and Romans, who granted the adopted son all the privileges of a natural son, including inheritance rights. We Christians are adopted children by grace; Christ himself, however, is God’s Son by nature.

It was in the garden on the Mount of Olives that Jesus called out, “Abba, Father! You have the power to do all things.” (Mark 14:36). ‘Abba’ is a universal term found all over the world for a child to address his/her father with intimacy, love and affection. In English, we might say, ‘Papa’ or ‘Daddy’. The Chinese term sounds almost exactly the same as ‘Abba’ - Ah Ba. Now we, too, can address our God in the same words and with the same feelings. For the traditional Jew or Muslim this would be unthinkable where the name of God is held in such respect that it can hardly be mentioned. (Matthew in many parts of his gospel goes out of his way to avoid directly using the name of God.)

Furthermore, “the Spirit himself joins with our spirit to bear witness that we are indeed children of God”. When it is clear from all our behaviour that we are filled with the Spirit of God and Christ, when our spirit and the Spirit of Christ merge as one in us, then we know that we are truly his adopted children.

From this, Paul draws another conclusion, “if we are children, then we are heirs, heirs of God and joint-heirs with Christ, provided that we share his suffering, so as to share his glory”. As adopted children of God, we share also in the inheritance that comes to Jesus. We are heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ. The glory that is Jesus’ will also be ours, provided we share in his suffering. It is presumed that we accept from God all the experiences, some of which may be very painful, that may come in living our faith openly, in publicly identifying with Christ and his Way and in giving witness to the Kingdom. We are not only heirs; we need to act like heirs, with our co-heir, Jesus, as our model.

GOSPEL (Luke 13:10-17)

Last Saturday we saw Jesus telling people that they should not be distracted from their own obligations by getting caught up in tragedies which happened to others. Rather than wonder about the eternal salvation of others, they should pay more attention to their own situation.

Today we have an example of people so busy criticising what others are doing that they are totally unaware of the emptiness in their own lives.

We are told that Jesus was teaching in a synagogue on a sabbath day. In the congregation was a woman who was suffering from what seems to be curvature of the spine for 18 years. There is a certain symbolism in the fact that she was badly stooped and was not able to stand up straight. Spiritually speaking, is that not also our problem too? So many of us are bowed down with the burdens and worries of our lives.

In fact, nearly all the healings done by Jesus can be seen as symbolic of deeper afflictions from which all of us can suffer - at the same time! Deafness (we can’t hear God speaking to us), blindness (we cannot see the truth or understand the Word of Jesus in the Gospel), dumbness (we can’t or won’t proclaim our faith), paralysis and other crippling afflictions (we are not able to do the things we ought to be doing), leprosy (we are cut off from relating with others or we cut other people off), possessed by evil spirits (in the grip of various compulsions and addictions).

Jesus saw the woman, called her to him and told her she was free from her affliction. Her affliction was seen as caused by an evil spirit and Jesus had liberated her. He laid his hand on her and immediately she stood up straight and began thanking God.

One might expect that everyone present would also start thanking and praising God for what had happened to the poor woman. But no. The chief of the synagogue was indignant that the healing had taken place on the sabbath. Medical services were not allowed on the day of rest.”There are six working days on which to be cured; the sabbath is not one of them,” he said.

The ruler of the synagogue was not a priest. He was responsible for conducting services, inviting people to read the Scriptures and preach, and in general of maintaining order. He was a layman who also had administrative duties such as taking care of the building. Normally, only one person held this post but sometimes it could be simply an honorary position.

In a way, of course, the ruler was perfectly right. A woman who had lived with this kind of ailment for 18 years could easily have waited for just one more day to be cured. But that was not the point, as Jesus made perfectly clear.

He accused the synagogue head and his like of pure hypocrisy. There was not one of them who would hesitate to take their ox or donkey from its stall on a sabbath day in order to give it water. They put the needs of animals before that of a human being.

And what could be more appropriate than to liberate this poor woman from the slavery of her affliction on the sabbath? All the synagogue head could see was the letter of the law. He could not marvel at the healing power of Jesus and the deep compassion behind it. He could not see that he was in the presence of God’s very power.

It would be like someone at Mass criticising the brevity of the reader’s dress while being totally oblivious to the Word of God she was reading - perhaps this very text!

There is also the sinister possibility, which was the case on other similar occasions, that the woman had been put there deliberately to see whether Jesus would violate the sabbath. It was not the sabbath that some of the religious leaders were concerned about but of gathering evidence to convict Jesus of heresy.

The story is an example of taking the beam out of our own eye before dealing with the speck in someone else’s or of none being so blind as those who refuse to see.

In the end, we are told that Jesus’ critics were left covered in confusion, while the ordinary people, often with far more insight than their religious leaders, joyfully marvelled at what Jesus was doing.

Week 30 | Tuesday

FIRST READING (Romans 8:18-25)

Another wonderful outburst from Paul. He has just been describing the difficulties that we face from the negative forces of our lower nature. Now he looks forward in hope not only for Christians but for the whole of the created world.

Today’s reading is an immediate continuation of yesterday’s. At the end of that reading, Paul had said we would be regarded as “co-heirs with Christ, provided that we share his suffering”.

He begins today’s reading by saying that no matter how much we may suffer in this life, it is as nothing compared to the future glory which will be made known to us. And this is true not only for Christians, because “the whole of creation is waiting with eagerness for the children of God to be revealed”. That revelation will take place at the Final Judgement when the true followers of Jesus (including, we might say, “anonymous Christians”) will be revealed and then the rest of creation will join them in glory.

Paul’s thinking is that the material world, originally created for Man, shares his destiny. After the sin in the Garden, the material world was also cursed. Yahweh said to the Man and the Woman, “Cursed be the ground because of you! In toil you shall eat its yield all the days of your life” (Gen 3:17). The material world is now deformed, impotent and decadent. However, like man’s body, it is destined one day to be redeemed, restored and glorified. It will share the same glorious freedom of the children of God.

For many of the Greek philosophers, too, matter was seen as evil and the human spirit must be delivered from it. Especially in the form of Gnosticism, it had great influence on Christian thinking. It was a movement which the early Christians had to resist. So Paul is saying that not only are those in Christ set free and destined to share in the glory of God but that the whole of material creation will also have this experience. The whole mystery of the Incarnation is an affirmation of the inherent goodness of all created things.”The Word was made flesh” (John 1:14). And there were some Christians who were not happy with this and wanted to reduce Christ’s humanity to mere appearance.

This “frustration” imposed on creation did not arise from creation itself but either as the result of man’s sinful behaviour or as part of the punishment which God imposed on Man. The natural abundance of the Garden is replaced by a world which made Man have to work very hard to make his living. But, just as all creation suffered because of Man’s sin, so it will be freed from its slavery to corruption and decay and brought into the same glorious freedom as the children of God.

In fact, the whole of creation, like a mother-to-be, has been “groaning in labour pains” for its liberation. But not only creation but “we, too, who have the first-fruits of the Spirit, even we are groaning inside ourselves, waiting with eagerness for our bodies to be set free”. Although Christians, as the “first-fruits of the Spirit”, are already beginning their new life of freedom in Christ, they are waiting for the final resurrection, the final stage of their adoption, the ultimate liberation when there will be no more tears, no more pain or suffering.

We, too, even though we are blessed with the gift of the Spirit through our incorporation by baptism in the Body of Christ, also await the final liberation of our bodies when there will be no more distress or suffering. As we pray in the Third Eucharistic Prayer: “Welcome into your Kingdom. all who have left this world in your friendship. There we hope to share in your glory, when every tear will be wiped away. On that day, we shall see you, our God, as you are. We shall become like you and praise you forever through Christ our Lord.”

Our link with that future is hope.”In hope, we already have salvation; in hope, not visibly present, or we should not be hoping - nobody goes on hoping for something which he can already see.” Hope is an integral part of faith. Faith and hope are based on what cannot yet be seen. But this faith-filled hope expresses an attitude of confidence that promises will be kept. It is not just a wait-and-see attitude. On the contrary, we live our lives on the basis that what we hope for in faith is true and real.

Hope is the basis of our faith. Hope here is not a desire that something may happen. It is a conviction, arising from our total trust in God’s love, that our final liberation and the liberation of all creation is a certainty. But, as Paul reminds us at the end of today’s passage, “hope is not hope if its object is seen. We cannot speak of hoping for something which is already within our grasp.”Hoping for what we cannot (yet) see means awaiting it with patient endurance.”

We do not know the how or the when but we live in this constant trust that God will not disappoint our deepest longings. At the same time, experience - our own and that of many other committed Christians - has shown that much of what we hope for is confirmed by our living the Gospel as faithfully as we can. The signs are a sense of inner joy, consolation and peace.

GOSPEL (Luke 13:18-21)

At this point Luke inserts two short parables about the kingdom of God which Jesus is inaugurating.

Let us remind ourselves briefly what we mean by the ‘kingdom of God’. The Greek word is basileia which is more accurately translated ‘kingship’ or ‘reign’. So it is a network of relationships rather than a place that we are talking about. The basileia of God occurs wherever people are submitting themselves to that loving power of God in their lives and in their mutual relationships, working together to bring God’s love and justice to the world.

Jesus is the symbol, the very embodiment, of the kingdom as, through him, God’s loving power breaks into people’s lives. And, insofar as they accept him and his message, the kingdom is being realised. In the Lord’s Prayer we ask God that the whole world may, in this sense, come under the reign of God when we say, “Your Kingdom come; your will be done on earth as in heaven.”

So today, Jesus gives two parables or images of the Kingdom.

First, he compares it to a mustard seed which a man planted in his garden. The tiny seed eventually grew into a sizeable bush so that the birds were able to make their nests in it.

When these words were written the Church, the agent of Jesus’ mission, was still tiny but it had already begun to grow considerably from its beginnings with a handful of Jesus’ disciples. There is an air of hope and confidence that it will continue to grow in spite of the persecutions and setbacks it is facing and will continue to face. How amazed would those Christians be to know that the seed since has grown not into a shrub but into a huge tree!

In our own time, we need to keep fresh the hope and confidence of this parable. In so far as we are dedicated to truth and love we have nothing to fear; ultimately they will and must prevail.

The second parable compares the reign of God to a small measure of yeast that a woman kneads into a batch of dough as she makes bread. In time, under the influence of the small amount of yeast, the whole batch will begin to swell and rise.

In Scripture, yeast, because it is a fermenting agent, usually symbolises what is evil and corrupt but here the emphasis is on its growth effect.

This is an image of how the reign of God spreads through the world. It does so by being totally inserted into that world. Externally it is not seen but its influence is felt everywhere bringing about gradual change. As Christians, we are called to be agents (though not the only agents) of the Kingdom. We can only do this by ourselves being fully inserted in our societies, not by separating ourselves from them. At the same time, we must keep our distinctively Christian vision just as the yeast, though invisible, remains distinct from the dough it is transforming.

If this looks like infiltration, it is! But not all infiltration is bad, not if it is driven by God’s truth, goodness and beauty. Such infiltration does not undermine but builds up and transforms.

Week 30 | Wednesday

FIRST READING (Romans 8:26-30)

Today’s reading follows immediately on yesterday’s. Paul continues his message of encouragement and hope.

“In the same way the Spirit comes to help us in our weakness, for, when we do not know how to pray properly, then the Spirit personally makes our petitions for us in groans that cannot be put into words.” Just as we saw that hope sustains the believer in his suffering, so the Spirit also is with him when he prays. Earlier Paul had spoken of the believer “groaning”, now it is the Spirit who “groans” as our petitions are passed on to the Father. Obviously, the Spirit does not literally “groan”. It simply means that he does not communicate in words or that his thoughts cannot be expressed in human language. (And why would the Spirit want to use our kind of language?)

And it is not that the Spirit, who is God, intercedes in the way that Our Lady or the saints are said to intercede for us. Rather it is through the Spirit, which has been given to us in Baptism, that the prayers we need to make are carried to the Father in language that we could never express.

“And he who can see into all hearts knows what the Spirit means because the prayers that the Spirit makes for God’s holy people are always in accordance with the mind of God.” Genuine prayers will not be haphazard requests for something we simply happen to want at any particular time. Nor will it be a kind of arm-twisting by which we try to make God arrange things in the way we would like. It is not surprising that, when what we ask for in that way does not happen, we can feel that God is not listening to us.

On the other hand, prayers that we make in and through the Spirit will always include the desire to know the will of God and for the strength to be able to carry it out in the different circumstances of our lives.”God gives good things to those who ask him.” And in Luke we read: “If you, with all your sins, know how to give your children good things, how much more will the heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him” (Luke 11:13). Ultimately, all genuine prayer will be made in through the Spirit of God because, ultimately, the purpose of our prayer is to be united with God. Our prayer is to be “Your will be done” and not “Lord, my will be done”. We do not just want to do God’s will reluctantly; we positively long to make our will conform to his. His wants and ours then perfectly coincide. And that is where our deepest happiness lies. The purpose of prayer is find out what that will is, to know where the Spirit is leading us.

The Jerusalem Bible has this to say about prayer in the New Testament:

Paul insists on the necessity of constant prayer taught by Jesus himself and practised by the early Christians. Paul is always praying for the faithful and asks them to do the same for him and for each other. These prayers must ask for growth in holiness but also for the removal of all external and internal obstacles to it; we have to pray, too, for the orderly conduct of the country’s business. Paul lays special stress on prayers of thanksgiving for every gift of God and particularly for the food God gives us; he begins all his own letters with a prayer of thanks and he wants the spirit of gratitude to pervade all the Christians’ dealings with each other. In liturgical gatherings prayers of thanksgiving and praise must predominate and these sentiments must inspire the hymns that the Christians compose for these occasions. It is the Holy Spirit who inspires the prayer of the Christian, and Paul prefers to emphasise this.

Paul now moves on to discuss God’s call for us to share his glory.

“We are well aware that God works with those who love him, those who have been called in accordance with his purpose, and turns everything to their good.” Or, “all things work together for the good of those who love God”. And our “good”, of course, is that we grow evermore into the likeness of Christ and become “other Christs”. It is difficult at times to see how certain experiences can be working for our long-term good, yet this is a conviction that we need to learn - that our loving God is present in every experience. Of course, that may be extremely difficult to see at the time and it may be only after a long period that we begin to see how this experience was beneficial, that it was a true learning experience.

Again and again, people have - perhaps not till much later on - realised that some very painful experience, such as a serious illness or the loss of a loved one, has been an occasion of personal growth and maturing. This will help people who ask “Why?” or “Why me?” when they have had a very bad experience. In the middle of everything it can be very difficult to see where God’s love is working but it is there. It takes time, it takes faith to realise that God’s love is in operation all the time.

It is a limited view of God which sees him as a kind of puppet master who gives good things to his friends and punishes his enemies. His thoughts are not our thoughts and his ways not our ways.

The sooner we come to understand his thoughts the better. And it is important to realise that this is not fatalism. Fatalism is to lie down passively under the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune. Nor is it the “opium of the people” which Karl Marx spoke about - passively putting up with a life of suffering (and exploitation by ‘capitalists’) because of the promise of a happy life after death. The true Christian responds actively and positively to every experience, trying to find God there and responding to his call. And finding happiness in the here and now.

Paul now speaks of how God, from all eternity, knew those who would “be moulded to the pattern of his Son, so that he should be the eldest of many brothers and sisters”. We are touching here on the issue of predestination. There are those who believe that God has decided from all eternity who will be saved and who will not and that there is nothing anyone can do about it. Either you are one of the lucky ones or you are not. There are those who take the number 144,000 of the elect, mentioned in the Book of Revelation, as the revealed number of the saved. That puts several billions of the world’s population, including the majority of Christians, totally out of the running and reduces God’s saving love to a lottery.

It can be understood, however, in a very different way. God’s knowledge is infinite and eternal. Everything that has ever happened or will ever happen is known to him simultaneously in an eternal NOW. For God there is no past or future. God then knows who are going to live their lives according to his will and those who will decide of their own free choice to reject him. If one may use a rough analogy. It is like a man who stands on top of a hill and looks down on a winding road below. He sees two cars approaching in opposite directions at high speed. They cannot see each other but the man on the hill knows that, inevitably, there is going to be a serious collision. He knows it is going to happen but he is not in any way responsible.

God then knows now which people will accept the message of Jesus and put their faith in him as Lord and who, with that faith and commitment, will gradually grow into the likeness of Jesus, their Lord and Brother. But, in so far as they are modelling themselves on him, Jesus remains the “eldest brother”. He is the One who holds the position of highest honour in the Father’s family to which we, the baptised, also belong. And he is the ‘natural’ Son, while are adopted by God’s gift.

Christ, as the perfect image of the Father, came among us to restore to fallen Man the original splendour which had been darkened by sin. In union with Christ, we can now be formed in the even greater image of a son of God. The glory which Christ as the image of God possesses by right is progressively communicated to the Christian until his body is itself clothed in the image of the ‘heavenly’ person.

“It was those so destined that he called; those that he called, he justified, and those that he has justified he has brought into glory.” Those whom God’s foreknowledge knows will do his will are those he has called (and who have answered his call). And because of their call and their positive response, they are ‘justified’, that is, they are made right with God through their openness to the ‘grace’ of his love poured into them. And these are the ones he will bring with him one day to share his glory.

Talk of predestination some may find disturbing. Predestination is really a way of speaking of God’s eternal knowing. God lives outside of time. For him there is neither past nor future; only the present. Each one of us has been in the mind of God eternally. The time of our arrival in his creation is known to him. The progress of our life and all the choices we make are known to him. We do not make our choices because he knows them; he knows our choices because we make them. God then knows from all eternity who says ‘Yes’ to him and who says ‘No’. All those who say ‘Yes’ can be said to be called and predestined for justification and glory; those who say a final ‘No’ are called but are not predestined - by their own choice - for justification and glory.

So, as far as God is concerned, our predestination is set because he knows what our choices and responses to his call will ultimately be. As far as we are concerned, it is not at all set because there are still opportunities for us to make a final ‘Yes’ or ‘No’. Is that worrying? It need not be. As Jesus told Thomas A Kempis, the author of the Imitation of Christ, if we concentrate on saying ‘Yes’ to Jesus at every moment of every day the future will take care of itself and there will be nothing to fear.

So, in the words of a cigarette advertisement many years ago: “Have you said ‘Yes’ yet?”

GOSPEL (Luke 13:22-30)

The Gospel today speaks in terms of predestination, of those who will ultimately be saved.

Jesus is steadily making his way to Jerusalem passing through many towns and villages. It seems that at this time he is in the region of Perea, on the east side of the Jordan, on his way to Jericho and Jerusalem.

He is approached by a man who wants to know if only a few will be saved. One has the feeling that he expects the answer to be ‘Yes’ and that he regards himself as being among the chosen ones.

Jesus does not answer the question directly but he implies that those who are saved are not necessarily those who regard themselves as God’s chosen ones but rather those who walk a certain path in life. That path, of course, is precisely what he is proposing through his own life and teaching. It is a narrow door, he says, which many will not be able to enter.

When the Master comes at the end to close that door for the last time, some will stand outside knocking and begging for the door to be opened. They will hear very frightening words, “I do not know where you come from.” They will counter by saying, “We ate and drank in your company. You taught in our streets.” But he still says he does not know them and tells them to go away.

Jesus was often accused of eating and drinking with sinners but it did them no good unless, as a result of their contact with him, they changed their way of living.

It is clearly not enough to be just in Christ’s company or to have heard his teaching, for example, being a baptised Catholic or even routinely fulfilling a few religious obligations like being physically present at Sunday Mass but not really part of what is going on. To go in the “narrow door” is to be actively committed to living the Gospel in one’s daily life.

Jesus’ next words are directed to some of the Jews but to Christians also. They will see the great patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets enter the kingdom, not because of their status but because of their commitment to serving God.

On the other hand, many of Jesus’ hearers will be rejected because they relied only on their ethnic and religious origins. But that is not enough. In the meantime, they will see people, Gentile outsiders from the four corners of the earth, people they rejected and despised, going ahead of them into the Kingdom, again because these people heard the call of God and entered by the narrow door that leads to life.

This was already being realised in the early Church as more and more Gentiles heard the Gospel message, were baptised and many died as martyrs. Indeed, as Jesus says at the end of today’s reading, those who were considered last are first and those who saw themselves as first are destined to be last.

It would be wrong for us to read this gospel as of mere historic interest. It is addressed directly to each one of us. It is vital that we, as Catholics, do not think that, simply on the basis of our membership of our Church, we are somehow on an inside track and that, if the worst came to the worst, we could always get a confession or a final anointing to set things straight. That would be very presumptuous and very dangerous on our part. We could very well be in a position to hear those terrible words, “I do not know who you are”.

Each day and all day of our lives we have to walk through that narrow door, that door of faith and trust and love for Jesus and our brothers and sisters. Only then will we find ourselves joining the patriarchs, the prophets and all the saints in that life of unending happiness and union with our God for which we were made.

Week 30 | Thursday

FIRST READING (Romans 8:31-39)

In recent readings, having moved from the powerful forces, which keep preventing us from doing the good, we went to the firm hope of a glorious future. Paul now moves another step in reminding us of the inalienable love that God has for each one of us.

It is put dramatically right in the first sentence: “If God is for us, who can be against us?” It is clearly a rhetorical question. The form of the condition makes it clear that there is no doubt about the answer. It is a question that requires no answer for it is clear that God is always for us - one hundred percent all the time. Of course, whether we are always for him is another matter altogether. Even then he reaches out to us in love. God is love; he cannot not love.

And, if we do have any doubts, then we just have to look at Jesus.”Since he did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for the sake of all of us, then can we not expect that with him he will freely give us all his gifts?” If God could sacrifice the One closest to him, the One who shares his very nature, can there be any doubt that he will deny giving us every other good thing? The cross is the guarantee of our preciousness in God’s eyes. And God will not want to see the work begun on the cross frustrated. It is important to remember all this especially in times of trouble.

“Who then can bring any accusation against those that God has chosen? When God grants saving justice, who can condemn? (from Isaiah 50:8)” How could anyone accuse us, when we have on our side Christ Jesus who died as a pledge of his love for us and, more than that, was raised from the dead and now sits at the Father’s right hand pleading on our behalf?

And there comes another rhetorical question: “Is there anything whatever that can separate us from the love of Christ?” And he is speaking of Christ’s love for us, not our love for him. No level of hardships or distress, persecutions, lack of food and clothing, or threats of violence can negate the reality of that love. We need to remember that at this time the Christians, not least in Rome, were being faced with violent opposition and persecution. It will soon be the age of martyrs, including Peter and Paul themselves. Apart from that, Paul could speak of the long list of hardships he himself experienced in this missionary work, some of which he tells us about in his Second Letter to the Christians at Corinth (2 Cor 11:16-33).

Paul wants to show his readers that suffering does not separate believers from Christ nor is a sign of his losing interesting in them but actually can carry them along toward their ultimate goal. In the eyes of their persecutors it seems like their defeat. In the eyes of pagans it must have looked like failure. But it is the martyr who lives on in people’s memories. And Paul quotes from Psalm 44:

For your sake we are being massacred all day long,
treated as sheep to be slaughtered.

Suffering is nothing new to God’s people and, as long as we are faithful to the call of the Gospel and are committed to sharing the message with others, there will be more to come. And it is precisely the love of Christ shown on the cross that enables us to come triumphantly through all kinds of hardships.

“In all this,” affirms Paul, “we are more than conquerors because of him who has loved us.” Just as Jesus conquered by his own death in shame and degradation, we also can do the same. In fact, as Hebrews says, it was through his obedient acceptance of suffering and death that he was made perfect. It was the conquest of love. For us it must be the same.

He concludes with a rallying cry for all those who may be suffering for their faith and indeed for every one of us.”For I am certain of this: neither death nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nothing already in existence and nothing still to come, nor any power, nor the heights nor the depths nor any created thing whatever, will be able to come between us and the love of God, known to us in Christ Jesus our Lord.”

The ‘powers’, ‘heights’ and ‘depths’ are probably the mysterious cosmic forces which to the mind of antiquity were in general hostile to mankind. None of these powers nor any other created thing whatever can come between us and God’s loving reach. There is, in other words, absolutely no force, however powerful, no happening, however terrible, which can come between us and the overwhelming love of Jesus for us.

It is a re-saying of something Paul mentioned yesterday that absolutely everything that we experience is imprinted with the loving hand of God.”Everything works together for those who love God.” And the reason is because our love of God has its source in the love of God for us, from which all love originates.

Certainly, there are times when it is difficult for us to see that. It must have been difficult for many of the martyrs of the early Church in the midst of their sufferings and yet it is now with praise and thanksgiving that we today celebrate their glorious memory.

If we can see the hand of God in what they did and were ready to suffer, it may help us to see his loving hand in our lives too.

GOSPEL (Luke 13:31-35)

Today Jesus is warned by some Pharisees to leave the area where he is teaching. The reason they give is that Herod is after him. This is Herod Antipas, a son of Herod the Great, whom we have already met. The region of Perea was part of his territory as tetrarch. The warning could, of course, have been just a ploy on the part of the Pharisees to get rid of Jesus by frightening him in this way.

At the same time, there could have been something in the threat because Herod had already executed John the Baptist, although there is no evidence that Jesus spoke against Herod in the way that offended Herod’s second wife.

In any case, Jesus is not moved. He knows that his life is part of a larger plan. He will do his work, including the healing of people and their liberation from evil forces. When the time is ripe, and not before, he will face his passion and death. He will attain his ‘end’, where ‘end’ has the double meaning of the end of his life on earth and his being brought to perfection through his suffering and death - an idea explicitly put in the letter to the Hebrews.

In any case, it has been decided that he will face his death in Jerusalem and nowhere else. Herod is not going to change any of that.

And then Jesus goes on to pray for the city that will be the scene of his death. It is a city that has many times in the past mistreated and killed those sent by God to bring his message. Jesus speaks tenderly of his being like a mother bird who protectively gathers her chickens under her wings. But they reject him, as they rejected many prophets before.

Then he foretells something that must have seemed to his hearers both blasphemous and impossible: “Your temple will be abandoned.” Yet, just 40 years after Jesus’ death, the temple will meet its destruction, never again to be rebuilt.

Finally, he tells them that they will not see him again until they themselves greet him by saying, “Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.” This could refer to his triumphal entry into Jerusalem at the beginning of Holy Week or to his final coming as Judge and Lord of all.

Our lives too are in God’s hands and nothing will happen to us which is in conflict with God’s wishes and God’s plans. Everything is - ultimately - for our well-being. But let us be on the alert to recognise the Lord coming into our lives often in very unexpected ways and through very unexpected people.

Some of those we reject may be bringing - even unknown to themselves - a message from God that we need to hear and follow.

Week 30 | Friday

FIRST READING (Romans 9:1-5)

Paul now moves on to a theme which causes him great pain, namely, the rejection of Jesus as Messiah by the vast majority of his fellow-Jews.

We hear people making a wholesale condemnation of the Jewish people for their rejection of Christianity but, here as in most situations, generalisations are highly inaccurate. Jesus himself and his mother were Jews. All of Jesus’ early disciples were Jews as were all of the first converts and, even after Gentiles began to be baptised, there were still Jews becoming Christians. However, the majority were not ready to accept Jesus as the expected Messiah and, in addition, they acted in some places very strongly against the Christians, whom they saw as renegade or heretical Jews.

Speaking of his own people Paul says that “there is a great sorrow and unremitting agony in my heart”. And he emphasises that these are not just empty words.”This is the truth and I am speaking in Christ, without pretence, as my conscience testifies for me in the Holy Spirit.” Perhaps some felt he was not sincere because elsewhere he has been extremely critical of the attitude and behaviour of some Jews - both Christians and non-Christians.

But he feels so strongly for the spiritual future of his people that he is ready to be cut off entirely from Christ if this would benefit the brothers and sisters who are his own flesh and blood. Literally, he is willing to be anathema, to be someone accursed and put under a ban of exclusion. And we know how intense Paul’s feelings were for Christ.”I live, no, it is not I but Christ lives in me” (Gal 2:20) In his letter to the Philippians his love for Christ is so great that he does not know whether he wants to live or die. In death, he would be with his beloved Christ forever; in life, he could continue his work of helping others to know the Christ he knows and loves, Phil 1:18ff).

The “brothers and sisters who are his own flesh and blood” are his fellow-Jews, the actual descendants of Jacob (who was also called ‘Israel’). The name ‘Israel’ was then used of the entire nation, then of the Northern Kingdom after the nation was divided, the Southern Kingdom being called Judah. During the period preceding and later in New Testament times, Palestinian Jews used the title to indicate that they were the chosen people of God. Its use here is especially relevant because Paul is about to show that, despite Israel’s unbelief and disobedience, God’s promises to her are still valid.

“They are Israelites; it was they who were adopted as children, the glory was theirs and the covenants; to them were given the Law and the worship of God and the promises.” Emanating from this ancestral link Paul lists all the privileges that came with it: their adoption as God’s children, the glory of God at times clearly evident among his people, the covenants with Abraham, with Jacob-Israel, with Moses, the worship of the one true God, the Law which expresses God’s will, the messianic promises and, finally, their physical relationship with Christ, a son of David. They have a very special place in God’s plan and it is no wonder that Paul grieves over their rejection of Jesus.

“To them belong the fathers and out of them, so far as physical descent is concerned, came Christ who is above all, God, blessed for ever. Amen.” From the Jews came the great patriarchs - Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and his twelve sons, after whom the tribes of Israel are named. But, above all, it is from them that Christ is physically descended in his humanity. Jesus was a Jew born of a Jewish mother. All his family were Jews and he spent his whole life, with only one or two very brief exceptions, immersed in Jewish society. He went to the Temple and attended the synagogue. At the same time Paul reminds us that Christ above all shares God’s divine nature in one of the clearest statements of the divinity of Jesus found in the entire New Testament.

Speaking of Christ’s origins and his relationship with the Father arising from the last sentence in the reading, the Jerusalem Bible comments:

Both the context and the internal development of the sentence imply that this doxology is addressed to Christ. Paul rarely gives Jesus the title ‘God’, though cf. Tit 2:13, or addresses a doxology to him, cf. Heb 13:21, but this is because he usually keeps this title for the Father and considers the divine persons not so much with an abstract appreciation of their nature as with a concrete appreciation of their functions in the process of salvation. Moreover, he has always in mind the historical Christ in his concrete reality as God made man. For this reason he presents Christ as subordinated to the Father, not only in the work of creation, but also in that of eschatological renewal. Nevertheless, the title ‘Lord’, Kyrios, received by Christ at his resurrection, is the title given by the Septuagint [the Greek translation of the Old Testament] to Yahweh in the Old Testament. For Paul, Jesus is essentially ‘the Son of God’, his ‘own Son’, ‘the son of his love’, who belongs to the sphere of the divine by right, the sphere from which he came, being sent by God. The title ‘Son of God’ became his in a new way with the resurrection, but it was not then he received it since he pre-existed not only as prefigured in the Old Testament, but ontologically. He is the Wisdom, and the Image, by which and in which all things were created, and have been re-created, because into his own person is gathered the fullness of the godhead and of the universe. In him God has devised the whole plan of salvation, and he, no less than the Father, is its accomplishment. The Father raises to life and judges, so does the Son raise to life and judge. In short, he is one of the three Persons enumerated in the Trinitarian formulae. (edited, text references omitted)

This Jewish tradition of which Paul speaks is a tradition which we Christians acknowledge and recognise by our constant reading of the Old Testament. In fact, we cannot fully understand Christ and the New Testament without making the Old Testament part of our tradition.

Jesus, as Matthew points out again and again, was not a turning away from Judaism but its fulfilment.”I have come not to destroy the Law and the Prophets; I have come not to destroy but to fulfil,” says Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5:17).

While we regret that many Jews still distance themselves from our faith - often, it must be emphasised, in good conscience - we must never contribute in any way to the hatred or discrimination that has been directed towards them over the centuries, not least by many who called themselves Christians, leading ultimately to the horrors of the Holocaust.

There can be no doubt that many Jews are very close to God and are our brothers and sisters and both communities should do all they can to come closer together and share their common heritage.

GOSPEL (Luke 14:1-6)

Today we enter a series of four teachings from Jesus, all connected with meals.

It begins with another example of a confrontation between Jesus and some religious leaders on a sabbath. Altogether there are seven sabbath healings recorded in the gospels, of which Luke mentions five. The other two are in John - the healing of the paralysed man at the Sheep Gate (5:10ff) and the healing of the man born blind (9:14ff).

Jesus had apparently been invited to have a meal in a Pharisee’s house on a sabbath day.

We have mentioned before that the word ‘Pharisee’ means ‘separated one’. They numbered about 6,000 and were found all over Palestine. They taught in synagogues, saw themselves as religious paragons and were self-appointed guardians of the Law and its observance. They regarded their interpretations of traditions to be virtually as authoritative as Scripture (cf. Mark 7:8-13). The Scribes studied, interpreted and taught the Law, both written and oral. Most of them were also Pharisees and hence they are often paired in the Gospel.

It certainly looks as if the invitation was what is known as a ‘set up’ because, we are told, “they observed him closely”. And there (what a coincidence!) right in front of him was a man suffering from dropsy, an accumulation of fluid in the body caused by some other illness. (This is the only place in the original Greek of the New Testament where the term Luke uses for this sickness is found.)

Far from being put on the defensive, Jesus immediately throws down a challenge: “Is it lawful to cure on the sabbath or not?” Strictly speaking, according to the letter of the Law as interpreted by the scribes and Pharisees present, it was not lawful. Because “curing” involved “medical work” and it could take time and energy. By asking them his question before the healing, Jesus made it difficult for them to protest afterwards.

And in fact they dared not give him an answer. To say ‘Yes’ could make them seem lax in their interpretation; to say ‘No’ would seem cruel to the man. So Jesus took the man, healed him on the spot and sent him off.

He then turns to his critics with another question: “If one of you has a son or an ox and he falls into a pit, will he not immediately rescue him on the sabbath day?” They had no answer because no answer was necessary or possible. What Jesus had done was unlawful only according to rabbinic interpretations but not according to the Mosaic Law itself.

Their mindset was revealed and it was not the mindset of Jesus. For them people came second to legalities. For Jesus the law was for people. Jesus was moved by compassion and the well-being of people. Sometimes that meant the law had to be put aside - a principle which they also recognised as proved by the examples that Jesus gave.

How many times have we become the victims of human respect? How often have we failed to go to the help of a person because we were afraid of what people might say or how they might judge us? They may even throw Church ‘rules’ and ‘commandments’ in our face as criticism. But no one who acts out of genuine love for others can go far wrong. No truly loving act can be sinful.

Week 30 | Saturday

FIRST READING (Romans 11:1-2,11-12,25-29)

Today we continue Paul’s reflections on the sad situation of many of his own people rejecting Christ as Lord and Messiah. (We have omitted reading all of chap. 10.)

Paul has just been speaking about how his people rejected God’s message to them in Christ and that they really have no excuse for doing so.”Is it possible that they have not heard? Indeed they have.” But now he goes on to ask if it is possible that God has actually abandoned his people in favour of Gentiles. It is out of the question. And the proof is that Paul himself, a pure-blood Jew, descended from Abraham and of the tribe of Benjamin, has heard and responded to the saving word of God in Jesus Christ as indeed had many other Jews. Furthermore, Israel, though unbelieving of Christ as Messiah, remains a chosen people. The ‘remnant’, its temporary representative, is the pledge of future restoration.”God never abandoned his own people to whom, ages ago, he had given recognition.”

Paul goes on to ask: “Was this stumbling - namely, their rejection of the Gospel - to lead to their final downfall?” This he strongly denies. What has happened is that their failure to accept the Gospel has, by default, brought salvation to the Gentiles.

The present unbelief of the Jews is only a preliminary step which God has permitted with a view to the conversion of the pagans and ultimately of the Jews themselves: for their own good God will make them “envious” of the pagans. Earlier Paul had quoted Moses (Deut 32:21) as saying, “I rouse you to jealousy with a non-people, I shall exasperate you with a stupid nation” (Rom 10:19).

The fall of the Jews has proved a great gain to the rest of the world and the Jews’ loss a great gain to the Gentiles. But how much greater will the gain be when the Jews, too, have restored to them all that they are at present losing.

At the same time, Paul warns the Gentile Christians not to be complacent, or to pat themselves on the back for making the right choice. God’s merciful plan to include the Gentiles in his great salvation plan should humble them, not fill them with arrogance. The Gentiles must never forget that it was from the Jewish people and its covenants with God that Jesus and salvation came to them in the first place. Perhaps some Jews have resisted hearing the Gospel message but that will only be until the Gentiles have been fully converted.

Paul refers to the Christian message as a ‘mystery’. Among some of the religions in Greece, the word ‘mystery’ referred to some truth which was only revealed to initiated members. Paul, however, uses it in the sense of something formerly not known but now revealed for everyone to know and understand. Examples would be the Incarnation, the meaning of the death of Jesus, God’s plan to unite all things in Christ and especially to bring both Jews and Gentiles into one community in Christ as Head. Here the ‘mystery’ being revealed is God’s plan by which both Jew and Gentile, after a period of disobedience by both, will in his mercy be included in his Kingdom.

“And this is how all Israel will be saved.” The Old Testament prophesied that as a result of the Messiah’s coming Israel would be cleansed of all her sins. (Some of the strongest criticism of Jews is to be found in the Old Testament.) Paul teaches that this prophecy, partially fulfilled already in the conversion of the Gentiles, implies the conversion of the Jewish people also.

In support of his statement he quotes from the Old Testament. Isaiah (59:20-21) says that a redeemer will come from Zion (Jerusalem), who will remove the godlessness of Jacob (Israel). In the original, the ‘redeemer’ seems to refer to God but Jewish tradition understood it as referring to the Messiah and this is how Paul seems to read it also.

And this ‘redeemer’ will be their mutual covenant with God, a covenant which will take away their sin. Just as salvation for Gentiles involves forgiveness of sin, so the Jews, when they are saved, are forgiven by the mercy of God - his forgiveness based on their repentance and faith in Christ as Messiah and Lord.

“As regards the Gospel they are enemies, but for your sake; but as regards those who are God’s choice, they are still well loved for the sake of their ancestors.” Right now the Jews are enemies because they have rejected the clear call of God in Jesus but it is only temporary. And as Paul has already said, their rejection of the Gospel has resulted in the Gentiles accepting it. But that rejection has to be balanced by God’s unchanging and unchangeable love for the Jews, guaranteed by the covenants he made with their ancestors, with Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and his sons, and Moses.

The reason is clear.”There is no change of mind on God’s part about the gifts he has made or of his choice.” God originally chose Israel as his people from whom the Saviour would emerge.”Salvation is from the Jews” (words of Jesus to the Samaritan woman, John 4:22) He will never renounce that choice. Even though Israel is presently in a state of unbelief [in Jesus as Messiah], God’s purpose will be fulfilled in her. And, Paul firmly concludes: “God’s gifts and his call are irrevocable.” God’s love is unchanging; his call his unchanging.

In all his grief and disappointment, it is this conviction that gives Paul hope for his people.

And that applies as much to us Christians as to the Jews. No matter what we do, no matter how far we distance ourselves from God, his love and his call are still there inviting us back.

And we are to remember that he is still calling the Jewish people, that he is still their God and they his people. We, too, are now his people but ultimately that depends on the degree to which we accept Jesus as Lord and live our lives accordingly.

GOSPEL (Luke 14:1,7-11)

Yesterday we saw how Jesus was invited to have a sabbath meal in the house of a Pharisee. We saw how the religious leaders present watched him to see if he would heal a sick man who was placed in front of him so that they could accuse him of breaking the sabbath law. The man was healed and Jesus’ accusers were reduced to silence.

The story continues today with Jesus commenting on the behaviour of the guests, each of whom vies for the honour of occupying the best places at the table. Speaking to them in the form of a parable, Jesus urges them to do the very opposite.

When invited to a wedding feast, it is quite dangerous, says Jesus, to go and take one of the best places because your host may come and ask you to give the place to someone else and you will lose a lot of face. On the contrary, says Jesus, make a point of going to the lowest place so that your host will come and say, “Please come and sit up here near me.” And you will get the admiration (and perhaps the envy) of your fellow-guests. (Of course, for someone with the mindset of the Pharisees, it was a risky thing to do. One might be left sitting at the bottom table!)

Luke may not only have been thinking of Pharisees. It is possible that manoeuvring for the places nearest to Jesus may have been a problem, even at the Last Supper. Luke says that while they were in the upper room that evening, an argument had broken out among them about which of them was the greatest (cf. Luke 22:24).

Jesus concludes with a general principle: Those who raise themselves up will be humbled and those who humble themselves will be raised up. It is another way of saying what Jesus has taught earlier, namely, that the greatest in the Kingdom of God is the one who puts himself at the disposal of others, who uses his gifts in serving the well-being of others and who has no interest whatever in titles, dignity or status.

True Christians put their self-value in the kind of person they are for others and not in some purely external trappings. They are what they are and not others think they are or are persuaded to think they are.

Week 31 | Monday

FIRST READING (Romans 11:29-36)

Paul continues to reflect on the strange ways by which the rejection of Jesus by the Jews has brought God’s mercy to the once disobedient Gentiles.

Once again he emphasises that, by turning to the Gentiles, God has not changed his mind about the giving of his gifts or the choices he has made in the past. His love for the Jews has not changed one bit. The problem is in the way they are responding to him by their rejection of Jesus Christ as his Son.

In the past the Gentiles, too, were disobedient to God but now, through the rejection of the Jews, God’s mercy and compassion has been shown to them. In the same way, says Paul, those Jews who are disobedient now will receive mercy through the same mercy which has been shown to the Gentiles.

In fact, “God has imprisoned all human beings in their disobedience only to show mercy to them all”. Disobedience is not peculiar to any particular group, be they Jews or Gentiles. There has been a period of disobedience for each in order that God may show mercy to them all. God’s door is open to every single person; it is for each one to make the decision to enter. That choice is up to each person to open themselves to God’s loving compassion.

Paul now ends the chapter and this section of the Letter with a profound doxology on God’s inscrutable wisdom.”How rich and deep are the wisdom and the knowledge of God! We cannot reach to the root of his decisions or his ways.”

This doxology is a natural outpouring of Paul’s praise to God, whose wisdom and knowledge brought about his great plan for the salvation of both Jews and Gentiles. As Paul has indicated throughout these chapters, both Jew and Gentile, despite the religious stubbornness of each, have received the gift of faith. Thus the divine plan or ‘mystery’ of salvation has become open and comprehensible to the whole human race.

He quotes from the great Psalm 139 on the all-knowing and ever-present God:

Who has ever known the mind of the Lord?

Who has ever been his adviser?

Who has given anything to him,

so that his presents come only as a debt returned?

- Ps 139:6,17

How and whom God calls is an impenetrable mystery and why some respond and others do not is equally beyond our understanding. There is nothing we can ever give to God which has not first been given to us by him.

We can only echo the concluding words of Paul: “Everything there is comes from him and is caused by him and exists for him. To him be glory for ever! Amen.” Blessed are those who come to understand this and make it the basis of all their living.

So often we try to reduce God down to our human level. And, when we do, we find ourselves getting into difficult situations, especially when we try to explain how and why things happen. We must never forget God’s two great attributes: his transcendence and his immanence.

Through his transcendence, God surpasses all we can possibly conceive about him. As St Thomas Aquinas tells us: as soon as we make an affirmation about God, it has to be denied. For, whatever truth may be in it, it is totally short of the full truth. For instance, we say “God is love”. Yes, up to a point but at the same time God’s love is something totally other than love in the limited way we can ever experience it on this earth.

Similarly in his immanence. God is totally present to everything he has made. Closer to me than breathing, as St Augustine put it. God is both so close and yet so far. So, in our trying to understand the situation of the Gentiles and the Jews we can only accept with humility the call we have received to follow Jesus. Similarly, with many other situations in life which we find difficult to understand.

While it is important that we always try to go as far as we can in our understanding, we also have to recognise that in probing God’s ways we will always be severely limited.

GOSPEL (Luke 12-14)

After giving the scribes and Pharisees advice on how (not) to choose a place at a banquet, Jesus goes on to teach his host what to do when he holds a dinner. He should not invite family members, relatives, friends and the influential rich from whom he can expect to get similar invitations in return.

Rather he should go out of his way to invite beggars, the crippled, the lame, the blind and be happy that these people can do nothing by way of repayment. This will be a proof of the genuineness of his generosity. Sharing meals with friends is a lovely thing but the point that Jesus is making that our mutual entertainment should not be at the expense of those who do not have enough to eat. It will be a real act of love and not be a form of self-seeking and self-aggrandisement or mutual back scratching in a never-ending entertainment circus.

It reminds us of what Jesus says in the Sermon on the Mount about loving those who love us.”Even the pagans do that.” There is no real virtue there. In fact, it can be a way of using people to our own advantage. It also reminds us of the parable of the rich man and Lazarus. In such circumstances, uncaring self-indulgence can in no way be justified.

We might remark here, of course, that there is no such thing as pure altruism, that is, an action that is done purely for others with absolutely nothing for self. Everything we do, we do ultimately for ourselves. We have no choice but to seek our own good; to act otherwise would be quite silly and even wrong. It all depends on how we do it.

A person can seek self by using, manipulating and exploiting others for one’s own gain. But a person can use all their energies for the good of others but, in doing so, there is a feeling of satisfaction in doing the right thing. Even one’s life can be sacrificed as the only way of satisfying self. For instance, a mother may not hesitate to sacrifice her life to save a child in danger. Not to do so would lead to a situation she might find difficult to live with for the rest of her life.

We do have to seek our own interests. We can do that at the expense of others or we can realise that it is by sharing what we have with others in need that we become enriched in a very special way.

Week 31 | Tuesday

FIRST READING (Romans 12:5-16)

As Paul comes to the end of his Letter (we will finish reading it this week), in his usual way he has some advice of a practical nature for the Christian community in Rome.

This does not mean that he has not said anything about Christian living up to this point but he now goes into detail to show that Jesus Christ is to be Lord in every area of our life. These chapters are not a postscript to the great theological discussions we have seen so far. What he has said about God and our relationship to him in Jesus Christ must also flow out into the way we behave and relate to each other. True faith cannot stand by itself. It must find expression in the way we act.”Faith expresses itself in obedience”, that is, in submitting ourselves totally to Jesus Christ and his Way.

Paul begins with a critical statement on which all that follows depends.”All of us, though there are so many of us, make up one body in Christ, and as different parts we are all joined to one another.” It is not just that each one of us through baptism is united with Christ but that, because of the presence of Christ in each one of us, we are essentially united to each other in one family. In his First Letter to the Corinthians Paul speaks of this at length. Speaking to the Christians he says plainly: “You are the Body of Christ. Every one of you is a member of it.” This is the basis for all that follows. We can only love and serve Christ in loving and serving each other. Christians are not isolated individuals. The community forms an interlocking and interdependent relationship in which each member offers their particular gift or charism in the service of the whole community.

Although we are united together as brothers and sisters in one family, there are important differences between each person. Unity implies diversity. Each one has been endowed with a distinct gift or ‘charism’ by which one serves the community in a unique way. These gifts are to be openly acknowledged and used for the good of the community and for individuals in it.

Paul then mentions some of these gifts:

- Prophecy: this is one of the most highly rated gifts; it is the gift by which a person communicates special messages from God to the community; such people are often gifted with a deep insight into the needs of the community, the direction in which it should be going. They may give words of encouragement or of warning. (We should, however, be aware that in other parts of the New Testament there are warnings about false prophets.)

- Service/Ministry: in the sense that one is called to give a special service to the needs of others. Some of these ministries are more formal than others and may be recognised by a laying of hands on the person chosen for a particular ministry. But everyone in the community is called on for service, which is really love in action.

- Teacher: those whose task it is to form the community in their understanding of the Christian message. They are distinct from the prophet.

- Exhortation: those who have a special gift for inspiring the members in living their Christian life to the full. Their counterparts today would be outstanding preachers or writers. But it can include all forms of encouragement in living the Christian life to the full.

- Alms-giving: in Paul’s time, many of the Christians were poor and not in a position to give alms. And in every community there would be the sick, the poor, the elderly, orphans and widows. But there would be some who had a surplus they could share and this they should do with generosity. Paul regularly urged richer communities to share what they had with poorer communities.

- Authority: the leaders of the community, e. g. the elders, should use the authority entrusted to them with care, with justice and, above all, to empower and enrich the community. It should never be used for the implementation of their own personal agenda or to exercise a sense of control over others. In the spirit of the Gospel, the one in authority is a servant, seeking the well being of those to whom he is responsible.

- Works of mercy: this was something all could do but perhaps some were temperamentally more suited to this work. Paul says it should be done with cheerfulness. There is nothing less desirable than those who offer help grudgingly and out of a sense of ‘duty’.”God loves a cheerful giver.”

Paul then goes on to some more general advice on the kind of attitudes that individuals should have in their mutual relationships. He mentions things like

- Sincerity: Always meaning what we say and saying what we mean.

- Avoiding what is clearly evil

- Loving one another with real affection, like brothers and sisters. We can ‘love’ in a very functional way as we respond to others needs. Paul is asking for a warmer relationship.”In brotherly love let your feelings of deep affection for one another come to expression and regard others as more important than yourself.” What he urges is real love and not just ‘charity’.

- Anticipating each other in showing respect and not always waiting for people to be respectful to us first or withholding respect if we don’t get any)

- In serving the Lord, working not half-heartedly but conscientiously and eagerly

- “Be joyful in hope, persevere patient in time of trial, and keep praying regularly”. One prays not only in hard times but keeps in union with God at all times.

- Look to the needs of brothers and sisters in Christ (the ‘saints’) and be generous in offering them the hospitality of our homes.

- Living in a society where Christians were suspected, hated and attacked, he urges them to “bless” their persecutors and not to curse them. This is advice that Jesus himself had given. To pay back one’s persecutors in kind is to bring oneself down to their level. Blessing and praying for them is not only not impossible; it is the only way to bring about change - in them and us.

- Rejoice with those who rejoice and weep with those who weep. Elsewhere Paul, speaking of himself will say that he is all things to all people. He adapts himself to their needs which is not at all the same as doing just what they want.

- Finally, he urges each person to have the same attitude to every person. Not in the sense of being blind to each one’s virtues and defects but, as God himself does, to reach out impartially to all with the same measure of love and concern, to be free of bias and prejudice and to act with real justice.

Reflecting on this passage, we can each ask ourselves what particular gifts has God given to me with which to serve both our Church community and the wider community? How often do I actually think about this?

It is something which, to some extent, we have lost in many of our parishes. So often in our Mass assemblies - which often is the only time we get together - we come as private families or as individuals with little concern or interest for those around us.”I go to the 11 o’clock Mass because the time is convenient and I like the choir.” By being “at” Mass I have fulfilled my “weekly duty”. Is that what the Eucharist is about? Where is that interlocking and interdependent community that Paul speaks about here?

The second part of the reading concerns more each individual and we could usefully make an examination of conscience on the headings that Paul lists and evaluate how well we are doing. Although they concern each individual, they are all linked to our relations with others.

GOSPEL (Luke 14:15-24)

Today we have the last of four teachings of Jesus linked with meals. It was prompted by the remark of a guest at table who said, “Happy are those who eat bread in the kingdom of God.” It was very common to associate the future Messianic kingdom with a banquet.

Jesus responds with a parable which is a warning to his complacent listeners, many of whom probably smugly presumed that they would be among the small minority chosen to eat in the Kingdom.

A man threw a large dinner party with many guests invited. But when the time came and the guests were reminded, one after another they gave excuses why they were not able to come. One had just bought a piece of land and had to inspect it; another had just bought some oxen and had to try them out; a third had just got married. It seems that the original invitation had been accepted but when the final invitation came excuses were made. In fact, none of the excuses has much validity. One would not buy a field and only then look at it nor would one buy oxen without having tried them out before the purchase.

On hearing this, the master got very angry and ordered his servants to go out into the highways and byways and bring in the poor, the crippled, the blind and the lame. After this, the servants reported that there was still room so they were given orders to scour the roads and bring in as many as they could find.”I want my house to be full,” said the host, “but none of those originally invited will taste a morsel.”

The parable is a clear message from Jesus to his Jewish listeners. Many of them, especially the religious leaders steeped in complacency and presumption, had rejected the invitation to follow Jesus and enter the Kingdom. Some of them would actually conspire to bring about his death. Their place would be given to those formerly seen as outcasts, both Jews and Gentiles, people aware of their needs, the “poor in spirit”. There would be a special place for the poor and the handicapped, people often seen by traditional Jews as people abandoned by God and buried in sin.

To go back to the beginning of the passage, blessed indeed are those who eat together in the Kingdom but it is clear that only those who respond to the invitation will enjoy the privilege.

We have no more right to presumption than those Jews who rejected Christ. We too are being invited to go into the Lord’s banquet hall but it is important that we respond to the call. We do that by our totally accepting and living out the teaching of Jesus our Lord. And part of that teaching is that we, too, invite and welcome into our community the poor, the crippled, the blind and the lame - taking these words in their broadest sense.

No more than those fellow diners of Jesus, our presence at the Kingdom banquet is never to be taken for granted.

Week 31 | Wednesday

FIRST READING (Romans 13:8-10)

Paul continues his practical advice to the Romans. The reading may be very short but its message should be engraved deeply on the heart of every person, including both Christians and non-Christians. What is striking in this passage is that God or Jesus is not mentioned at all but both are clearly understood to underlie the statements.

Paul says that the only debt we should incur with others is the debt of love, because, in loving another person we are fulfilling all the requirements of law.

The love owed to others is the one debt that can never be paid off. No matter how much we have loved, we are still under an obligation to keep on loving. And this love is not only extended to fellow Christians but must include every other person, including those who wish us harm. And, in doing so, we are not only fulfilling the requirements of the Mosaic Law but of all law. And, if by observing a particular law, I violate the law of love, that law cannot be obeyed.

So, says Paul, “all these: You shall not commit adultery, You shall not kill, You shall not steal, You shall not covet, and all the other commandments that there are, are summed up in this single phrase: ‘You must love your neighbour as yourself’.” In the original quotation from Leviticus, ‘neighbour’ meant a fellow-Israelite but here it is extended to include every other human person, as we see in the parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37).

Jesus actually pushed that commandment even further. At the Last Supper he gave his disciples what he called a ‘new commandment’: “Love one another as I have loved you.” Here the level of love is extended to match the love of Jesus which led him to “empty himself” and sacrifice his life for every single one of us.

The commandment also presumes that we love ourselves. Probably, most of us feel that we do and even feel guilty about being selfish and self-centred. But that is not real self-love. Real self-love means the total recognition and acknowledgement of ourselves as we are, including both strengths and weaknesses. Most of us try to hide our real selves by hiding behind masks and creating an image that will impress others. That is not a sign of real love of self. But without a healthy self-love there is a lack of inner security making it difficult to reach out in love to others. *

Paul says that that love is the fulfilment of the law because genuine loving can cause no harm to brothers and sisters. Keeping the law in a legalistic fashion can do a lot of harm. This is what Jesus had against the Pharisees - they put law before love.

Paul’s teaching reminds one of St Augustine’s famous dictum: “Love and do what you like” or St Paul’s own saying, “Love covers a multitude of sins”. If one’s actions are motivated by a genuine love and concern for the wellbeing of others we cannot go wrong. A truly loving person is not going to commit adultery, is not going to kill or hurt, is not going to steal, or to cast covetous glances at what belongs to another.

The word for ‘love’ used by Paul is agape (‘agaph). It is a special kind of love. It can be described as ‘a passionate desire for the well-being of the other’. It is a unilateral love in the sense that it is given and continues to be given even when there is no response or even if it is rejected. It is the love that God extends to all created things and God’s agape is the source of all love in us. And wherever there is agape, there is God, because God is agape. And that is why Paul can say that all the requirements of our faith are fulfilled, if all our words and actions are motivated by that agape.

Even in our church life, people can become very legalistic and set a lot of store by laws and regulations with very little love being shown. Many put the Ten Commandments ahead of the law of love. Yet, as Jesus showed with the Pharisees, it is possible to keep the law without a shred of love. One can keep many of the commandments - especially those expressed negatively - by doing absolutely nothing!

But it is only through the love which we show for all those around us that the quality of our Christian life is measured. It is only by that love that our union with God is manifested. Observing laws, however exalted, is not enough. And doing nothing is of no help either.

Love involves a constant and unconditional reaching out to all, friends and enemies, young and old, Christian and non-Christian, educated and illiterate, fellow country people and foreigners, close relatives and perfect strangers.

And, as has been said, it is striking that God or Jesus are not mentioned in the whole passage. The message is clear: I cannot love God and bypass my brothers and sisters, including the most obnoxious. It is no use spending hours in front of the Blessed Sacrament if I am not also constantly reaching out to find and serve Jesus in those around me. It is not difficult to talk to Jesus in the tabernacle. It can be much more difficult with an unreasonable boss or a rebellious teenage son or an aggressive drug addict. Finding Christ there and responding to him in such situations is the real test. At the same time, we thank God for the presence of Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament as it is a wonderful environment for prayer and contemplation and to reflect on the degree of loving others in our daily lives.

*cf. the interesting book on this topic, Why Am I Afraid to Tell You Who I Am? by John Powell SJ.

GOSPEL (Luke 14:25-33)

Luke’s gospel is noteworthy for its extremes. On the one hand, it shows the radical and uncompromising demands that Jesus makes on those who would be his followers and, at the same time, emphasises as none of the other gospels do the gentleness and compassion of Jesus for the sinful and the weak. Both pictures have always to be kept simultaneously in view and they are in no way contradictory. Today and tomorrow we will see both of these images of Jesus back to back.

In today’s passage we see Jesus, as was often the case, surrounded by a huge crowd of people. They are full of enthusiasm and expectation but Jesus very quickly pulls them up short. If anyone comes after him, Jesus says, and is not prepared to hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters and indeed his very own self, he cannot be accepted as a disciple. This is a very shocking demand, especially for a society where people’s whole lives were centred on their families. Luke is alone in asking that even the wife, too, be abandoned but this is just an example of the totality of our commitment to following Jesus.

However, we have to make two qualifications. The word “hate” is a Semitic expression not to be taken literally. It could not be so taken as the whole of Jesus’ teaching is based on love not only of blood relatives but of strangers and even enemies. It is rather a dramatic way of saying that anyone who puts any person, even those closest to them, before total commitment to Christ and his mission is not ready to be a disciple. There can be no compromise here; it is all or nothing.

We also have to say that Jesus is not recommending a literal abandonment of one’s family. That could be highly irresponsible and a violation of that commandment of universal love. But it is clear that, for those who want to be part of Jesus’ work, they have to give themselves completely and unconditionally. And, where there is a choice between the clear call of the Gospel and personal attachments, they have to let go of the latter.

It is important for the crowd to hear this. Following Christ is not just like football fans stalking their favourite player or ‘groupies’ following a pop star from city to city. There is a price to be paid and they need to know that there is one and what it is. That price is the cross, a level of sacrifice and suffering - perhaps even of one’s life - that each one must be prepared to undergo for the sake of the Gospel and the building of the Kingdom.

So, to illustrate this Jesus gives two examples:

- One is of a man who had a plan to build a tower. Before he started, he made sure that he had all the necessary resources. Otherwise he might find that, after laying the foundations, he could not finish the work and he would become the laughing stock of others.”Ha! Ha! He began to build what he could not finish.”

- In the second example Jesus speaks of a king with 10,000 soldiers who finds he is going to war with another king who has 20,000. If he thinks there is no way he can win, he will send an embassy to negotiate the best peace terms he can get.

Similarly, says Jesus, no one can be a disciple of his who is not ready to let go of everything he has.

The following has to be absolute and unconditional. How many of the crowd listening were ready for that? How many of us are ready for that? Am I ready? And what are the things I am clinging to? What are the things I cannot let go of? And why?

To be a disciple of Jesus means being absolutely free. It reminds one of Francis of Assisi leaving his family and taking off all his rich and fancy clothes to replace them with a beggar’s rags and being filled with a tremendous sense of joy and liberation. Do I want to be a disciple of Jesus? To what extent? Am I ready to pay the price he asks?

The paradox is that once I pay the price I will get so much in return. Ask Francis or Mother Teresa.

Week 31 | Thursday

FIRST READING (Romans 14:7-12)

Chapter 14 of Paul’s letter to the Romans is one of the most inspiring passages in the New Testament. It is a hymn to tolerance and the acceptance of others.

Because the Christian community consisted of both former Jews and Gentiles there were often disagreements still over certain ritualistic practices which had been carried over from Judaism.

To the Jews, the attitudes of the Gentiles seemed very lax, if not downright wrong. To the Gentiles, some Jews seemed over-scrupulous and legalistic. What Paul recommends is that each one be tolerant and understanding of the weaknesses of others and not to cause unnecessary offence.

Today, Paul reminds us that there is only one Lord and that is Jesus Christ. It balances yesterday’s reading about the primacy of love. The real object of that love must always be God and Jesus, found in every person.

And so he says, “None of us lives for himself and none of us dies for himself; while we are alive, we are living for the Lord and when we die, we die for the Lord: and so, alive or dead, we belong to the Lord.” None of us has an independence of our own. In life and in death we belong totally to the Lord. This, of course, is a fact which no believing person can deny but, if it is also a genuine conviction, then it also needs to be acknowledged and lived out in our lives.

And that, says Paul, is the purpose for which Christ both died and came to life again - that he would in a special way be Lord of both the dead and the living.

How, then can an individual abrogate to himself the right to sit in judgement over a brother or sister? Or have the right to look down on a brother or sister? As is clear from the overall context of the chapter he is referring to some of the weaker brothers and sisters who, for instance, will not eat food that has been offered to idols for fear they will be seen as not true converts from paganism. Paul regards them as still weak in their faith.

Paul himself, who knows that idols mean nothing and are only man-made images, does not care where food comes from but, in the presence of such people, he will not eat that food rather than upset them.”It is best to abstain from eating any meat, or drinking any wine, or from any other activity which might cause a brother or sister to fall away, or to be scandalised, or to weaken.” Jesus had strong words of warning for people who were stumbling blocks in the way of the “little ones”, those still in the early stages of faith. It is something we need to keep in mind.

Of course, Paul is speaking of issues which do not touch the core of our faith. Among Catholics today such an issue could be taking Communion in the hand or on the tongue. People may have strong ideas about one or the other but neither side has the right to pass definitive judgement. It will not be on an issue like this that we will be judged - nor should we judge others either.

We are not isolated masters of what we do or say. We do not live in a moral vacuum, where we only have to be answerable to ourselves. Everything we do has an affect on others and we are responsible for the influences we exert for good and for bad.

There can only be one Judge and he is the One before whom all of us will have to stand some day. Only one Person has all authority before which all must bow.”By my own life, says the Lord, every knee shall bow before me, every tongue shall give glory to God” (Is 45:23). And so, says Paul in conclusion, “It is to God, then, that each of us will have to give an account of himself.”

So then, how can we take it on ourselves to sit in judgment on others, as has obviously been happening among some of the Christian communities with which Paul is connected? It is not for any of us to judge the behaviour of brothers and sisters. It is not for us to condemn them for their weaknesses which we don’t happen to have. God will do that in his own time. Only he knows what inner motives and the resources people have to do good. Our sole concern should be to be ready to give an account of our own stewardship.

That does not mean, of course, that we will not be called on to evaluate the conduct or the behaviour of other people. For instance, a prospective employee will be evaluated by an employer as to his or her suitability for a particular post. We do not just allow anyone who applies to become a teacher or a policeman or a priest.

But evaluating a person’s intellectual or other capacity is not the same thing as passing a definitive judgement on the person. We may utterly condemn the work of a terrorist in blowing up a building full of innocent people but we cannot pass a final judgement on such a person, whose inner motives and convictions are hidden from us and who also can change and become a totally different person. Today’s terrorist can be tomorrow’s highly respected prime minister. Many of the people we now regard as saints were guilty of seriously immoral behaviour in their earlier lives.

GOSPEL (Luke 15:1-10)

If yesterday’s Gospel showed Jesus at his most radical (“No one can be my disciple unless he gives up everything he has”), today we see his compassionate and understanding side. They are not contradictory.

The gospel says that tax collectors and sinners were gathering round to listen to Jesus. To some of the Pharisees and scribes this was quite scandalous.”This fellow [Greek houtos, ‘outos: one can hear the contempt in the phrase] welcomes sinners and eats with them.” As far as they were concerned, any God-fearing person, not to mention a rabbi-teacher, would have absolutely nothing to do with such people.

It was bad enough socialising with them but to share their food was unthinkable; they were unclean and one became unclean by sitting at the same table with them. To eat with people was a sign of recognition and acceptance; as far as the Pharisees were concerned these were non-people. It only confirmed the Pharisees and scribes in their opinion that Jesus was a person to be removed.

In reply, Luke gives us three separate parables touching the same theme. We have two of them today. The third and most famous - the Prodigal Son - will not be read at this time but will appear elsewhere in the liturgical readings (Year C, 24th Sunday).

Each one is a picture of God’s attitude towards the sinner and it is very different from that of the Pharisee.

The first is of a shepherd who has lost one of 100 sheep entrusted to his care. The theme of the sheep and the shepherd is common in the Old Testament. We think of the famous Psalm 23 (‘The Lord is my shepherd. ‘) and a beautiful passage in Ezekiel (34:11-16). Without hesitation, the good shepherd leaves the 99 “good” sheep and goes off looking for the stray. When he finds it, he puts it on his shoulders and comes back in jubilation, inviting all his friends and neighbours to rejoice with him.”Rejoice with me for I have found my lost sheep.”

Similarly, concludes Jesus, there will be more rejoicing in heaven over one sinner who sincerely repents and comes back to God than over many (self-?)”righteous” people who have no need to repent, or who think they have no need to repent. There seems to be an ironic and sarcastic tone here. Who does not need to repent of something at some time? Jesus presents a totally different attitude to the repentant sinner, and he gives it as God’s own attitude.

The second parable is similar. A housewife who has 10 silver pieces - probably the sum total of her wealth - has lost one of her coins. Will she not turn the whole house upside down looking for it? A house like this would typically have no windows and rough earthen floors (and, of course, no electricity!), making a search quite difficult. But, when she does eventually find it, she will call in all her friends and neighbours to share her joy.”Rejoice with me! I have found the coin I lost.” Again Jesus says there will be even more joy than this in heaven over one sinner who repents. ‘In heaven’, of course, means ‘with God’.

We need to remember that these stories were told as Jesus’ response to the criticism of some scribes and Pharisees. He had absolutely no reason to apologise for his mixing with tax collectors, sinners and other social and religious outcasts. He was like the shepherd or the housewife. He was looking for people who were lost so that he could bring them back.

He spent time in their company not because he did not mind what they did; on the contrary, his whole purpose was to change them. But he could not do that at a distance.

The mind of the Pharisee was different. These people were sinful and unclean and the “good” person had to have no contact with them of any kind or they too would become unclean.

Notice the different motivation. The Pharisee was only thinking of his own spiritual and ritual purity. Jesus was thinking of the person who was lost and needed to be brought back to a world of truth and love. And so he reached out. He went to where the sinner was. Although the Pharisee thought he was spiritually and morally strong, yet his avoiding the sinner showed he was afraid of contamination. Jesus was not afraid of such contamination; he was the really strong one. He could be with the sinners without becoming one of them.

Much of this is highly relevant for our Christian life today. There is probably a lot more of the Pharisee in our Christian hearts than we are prepared to admit.”Good” Catholics tend to keep away from “immoral” situations and the people who are there.”Good” Catholics do not like to be seen in certain places which do not have a “good” reputation. They even call them “occasions of sin”.

We tend to live in enclosed enclaves (we can hardly call them ‘communities’) taking care of our own spiritual welfare. But that is not the Church that Christ founded. We are called to proclaim the Gospel. We are called to reach out to the sinner. To do so we have to welcome them and eat with them. Instead of living in sanitised suburbs, we should be down in our inner cities, in our pubs and discos, in our “red light” districts reaching out and listening and, where possible, bringing back a sheep that is lost and does not know where it is going.

Week 31 | Friday

FIRST READING (Romans 15:14-21)

We begin today the reading of the epilogue to Paul’s rather long letter. As he comes to the end of his message he makes some general remarks about issues touching on his evangelising work.

He begins by saying that he is sure they will understand the reason for his writing to them even though the Roman church is not one founded by him and even though they are “full of goodness, fully instructed and capable of correcting each other”. But he wants to refresh their memories on a few points. Does this mean that he had written to them earlier or that he is just referring to general points of Christian teaching known to all?

He reminds them that he had been given a special grace to proclaim the Gospel of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles, so that they could become “an acceptable offering, made holy by the Holy Spirit”. He always sees this as his special calling. He sees this apostolic calling almost as a liturgical function in which the offerings are those people whom he has brought to Christ and offers to God. Paul’s priestly function differed from that of the levitical priesthood which involved sacrifices in the Temple. Paul’s apostolate was to bring Gentiles into the Christian family through preaching the Gospel and making the Gentile churches an offering in Christ to God.

He then reminds the Romans of what he has achieved, “so I can be proud, in Christ Jesus, of what I have done for God”. He is not bragging for he knows that all he has done has been done through the power of Christ working in and through him. And he only speaks of his own personal achievements.”I can dare to speak only of the things which Christ has done through me to win the allegiance of the Gentiles, using what I have said and done, by the power of signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God”. Some of these ‘signs and wonders’ are described in the Acts of the Apostles.

He was not the only evangelist and there were, of course, all those who consolidated the work which he began in each place.

And his evangelising has extended all the way from Jerusalem to Illyricum - these were the two extremes of his missionary journeys at the time of writing this Letter. Jerusalem was the home of the mother church and from where the preaching of the Gospel originated. It is not certain whether he actually entered Illyricum because there is no mention in the Acts of Paul being there. It was at this time a Roman province, north of Macedonia (where Paul certainly had gone) in what is now Albania and the former Yugoslavia.

In saying that he has “fully proclaimed the Gospel” in the eastern Mediterranean does not mean that evangelising work has been completed but only that he has fulfilled his personal mandate which will, of course, have to be continued by the new Christians resident in each place.

He mentions another principle which he strictly observed. He only preached the Gospel in places where it had not been already preached.”I do not build on another’s foundations.” We know that there were other evangelisers and they are mentioned by Paul in his letters. Paul was guided by a saying from the prophet Isaiah:

Those who have never been told about him will see him,

and those who have never heard about him will understand (Is 52:15).

It is something that we might seriously reflect on in our own Church and in our own parishes today. We would have to admit that a great deal, if not nearly all, of our pastoral energies are directed at the already converted. Yet there are growing numbers of people even in so-called “Catholic” countries who have never heard the Gospel proclaimed. And, as Paul says earlier in this Letter, “How can they believe if they have never had the message spoken to them?”

We too could reflect profitably on some of Paul’s words in today’s reading:

- We too have been called to be evangelists, to share the Gospel message with others.

- Whatever we accomplish in bringing others to Christ will be his work and not ours alone. Yet we may be the necessary instruments he needs to use.

- There are places and people which will never hear the Gospel message unless we speak and act. It may even be in our home, in our working place or with our friends. Let us not deprive them of this grace which could transform their lives.

A question we might ask is: How many adults are baptised in our parish every year? How many ‘lapsed’ members have been brought back in the past year?

GOSPEL (Luke 16:1-8)

After the three wonderful parables about God’s mercy and longing for the reconciliation of the sinner, Luke swings back again in chapter 16 with two parables and related teaching about our use of material possessions and puts some of the responsibility for our salvation back on ourselves.

The first is a story about a rather dishonest steward or manager. His responsibilities were to handle all the business affairs of his employer. However, he had been mishandling his employer’s funds and was about to be fired. One thinks of the prodigal son who utterly wasted the inheritance his loving father had given him.

Immediately the steward begins to think of his future. He does not have the strength to do manual labour and to go begging would be a terrible loss of face. So he thinks of a stratagem by which he calls in all his employer’s debtors and reduces the amounts they owe.

The debts incurred were considerable. One hundred measures of olive oil was equivalent to about 800 gallons or the yield of 450 olive trees, while 100 measures of wheat was equal to about 1,000 bushels or the yield of 100 acres. Very few farmers would have had anything like that kind of land in Jesus’ time.

By doing this favour, the steward hopes to be able to find alternative employment with one of them. Surprisingly, his employer, far from being angry, praises the farsightedness of his corrupt steward .

Some commentators question whether the steward was actually acting dishonestly. Was he actually denying his employer money which he was really owed or was he rather writing off the ‘commission’ which was being usuriously charged, thus inflating the proper amount owed? The Mosaic law forbade taking interest on loans from fellow Jews so one way of getting round this was to overcharge debtors. By reducing the debts to the proper level the steward was correcting an injustice and, at the same time, making these debtors favourably disposed towards him. Whatever the interpretation, the point Jesus is making is the same: the steward acted with shrewdness and intelligence to guarantee his future.

Jesus concludes by pointing out that the worldly are far more astute in providing for their future than are those who are regarded as spiritual, the ‘children of light’. Jesus is in no way condoning the steward’s dishonest and corrupt behaviour. What he does praise is his clear-sighted preparation of his future.

The lesson for us is clear. If a man can do that for his earthly career, what about our future in the life to come? If we want to guarantee our future life with God then we, too, need to take the necessary steps. Those steps are clearly laid out in the Gospel and, in general, they involve a life which is built on truth and integrity, and on love, compassion and justice with regard to the people around us. Our task is to work with God in making his will our own and in building up the Kingdom.

If we do this on a daily basis, then we have nothing to worry about and our future is assured.

Week 31 | Saturday

FIRST READING (Romans 16:3-9,16,22-27)

We come today to the end of the abridged reading of this great letter of Paul to the Romans. Even four weeks of readings hardly do justice to it and many important passages have had to be omitted. Some of them will appear in other parts of the Church’s liturgy.

In today’s final reading Paul sends his greetings to a large number of people. Even though he has not yet been to Rome, he knows many of the Christians there as he had met many of them in his travels around Asia Minor and Greece.

The first people on his list are Prisca and Aquila, whom he calls “my fellow-workers in Christ Jesus”. They were not only partners with him in proclaiming the Gospel but also worked in the same trade of tentmaking. He first met them in Corinth as the Acts tell us: “Paul left Athens and went to Corinth [in the south of Greece]. There he found a Jew named Aquila, a native of Pontus [in Phrygia, Asia Minor] recently arrived from Italy with his wife, Priscilla. An edict of [Emperor] Claudius had ordered all Jews to leave Rome. Paul went to visit the pair, whose trade he had in common with them” (Acts 18:1-3). (Claudius is the same as he of “I, Claudius” fame.)

He expresses his thanks and that of all the Gentile churches for their having saved his life. This was possibly during the riot of the silversmiths in Ephesus (Acts 19:23ff). They had rioted because they felt Paul’s preaching would threaten their business of making silver images of Artemis, the goddess of the great temple in Ephesus. Paul wanted to confront them but some of the disciples (including Prisca and Aquila?) persuaded him to stay away from certain trouble.

And he sends his greetings to the whole ‘church’ at the house of Prisca and Aquila. At that early period, ‘churches’ or Christian communities in a particular place would meet in the house of a community member. Church buildings would only come later when numbers got so big that family homes were no longer big enough.

There are also greetings to other members of the Roman church:

- Epaenetus, who is described as “the first offering that Asia made to Christ” and indicating that he is the first convert from the Roman province of Asia (now a part of modern Turkey).

- Mary, “who worked so hard for you”. There are six different women called Mary in the New Testament but, apart from this reference, it is not known who this one is.

- Andronicus and Junias, described as “outstanding apostles” and “my kinsmen and fellow-prisoners, who were in Christ before me”. They are “apostles” in the wide sense of active evangelisers and not in the strict sense used of the Twelve chosen by Jesus. They also became Christians before Paul did and had also been in prison with him at some stage. We know that Paul was imprisoned several times.

- Ampliatus, “my dear friend in the Lord”

- Urban, “my fellow-worker in Christ”

- Stachys, “my dear friend”

In the verses immediately following but not included in our reading, there are more names mentioned.

Paul tells all to greet each other with a “holy kiss”. Justin Martyr (AD 150) tells us that the ‘holy kiss’ was a regular part of the worship service in his day. It is mentioned also at the end of the First and Second Letters to the Corinthians, in 1 Thessalonians and 1 Peter. It still exists in some Christians churches, including the ‘Sign of Peace’ before Communion in the Catholic liturgy. Some people do actually kiss or embrace.

Finally, he tells the Romans that all the churches of Christ send their greetings. This greeting, not found elsewhere in Paul’s letters, indicates a special respect for the church in Rome.

This is followed by some final greetings from those who are with Paul. One of these is from Tertius, who says he is the one committing the letter to writing as Paul’s secretary. He is not mentioned elsewhere in the New Testament.

There is a greeting from Gaius, who is Paul’s host in Corinth and who also “hosts” the whole of the local church, which meets in his house. He is usually identified with Titius Justus, a God-fearer, in whose house Paul stayed while in Corinth. His full name would be Gaius Titius Justus.

The last two greetings are from Erastus, the city treasurer, and Quartus. At Corinth archaeologists have discovered a reused block of stone in a paved square, with the Latin insciption: “Erastus, commissioner of public works, bore the expense of this pavement”. This may refer to the Erastus mentioned here. He may also be the same person referred to in Acts as a companion of Timothy and in the Second Letter to Timothy. Because the name was common, his identity is not certain.

Paul closes the letter with a doxology of praise to the Father and the Son, although it appears earlier in the letter in some manuscripts or is omitted altogether. It is a solemn presentation of the main points of the Letter.

It is a prayer to God who can make the Romans strong in accordance with the gospel Paul preaches and following the proclamation of Jesus Christ and in harmony with that ‘mystery’ which had been kept secret for so long but which now, as the prophets foretold is now revealed. This ‘mystery’ is God’s plan to bring salvation to the whole world through the Incarnation of his Son and his suffering, death and resurrection. He wants them to be firmly grounded in the teaching he gave and firm in the living out of their faith. And the gospel that Paul preaches is not something different but it is based on the direct revelation he received.

The idea of a ‘mystery’ of wisdom, long hidden in God and now revealed, is borrowed by Paul from the Jewish apocalypse but he enriches the content of the term by applying it to the climax of the history of salvation; the saving cross of Christ; the call of the pagans; to this salvation preached by Paul and finally the restoration of all things in Christ as their one head.

- Jerusalem Bible (text references omitted)

This ‘mystery’ of the Gospel message, still known only to a relative few, is now to be proclaimed to the whole world - “to be made known to all the nations, so that they obey in faith”.

Lastly, the doxology proper:

“To him, the only wise God, give glory through Jesus Christ for ever and ever. Amen.”

God is the origin of all wisdom and so for ever is to be given glory through Jesus Christ.

What comes out of these greetings in both directions is the strong sense of fellowship and solidarity which existed among the early Christians. It is something we need very much to cultivate in our very individualistic societies and, in some cases, very individualistic church gatherings.

This is needed too if we are to strengthen each other in our Christian faith. A solitary Christian is a contradiction in terms. It is not surprising that so many Catholics, left to their own devices, fall away and develop very distorted ideas of what their faith is about. One way of correcting that is to go through the whole of this Letter carefully with the guidance of a good commentary.

GOSPEL (Luke 16:9-15)

Yesterday we saw Jesus give the example of a corrupt but astute manager who took effective steps to guarantee his future employment. Today he goes on to warn us about our own use of material things.

We are to use “dishonest wealth” in such a way that we “make friends for ourselves” (our most important friend being God!) and when it fails us (as it ultimately will) that “a lasting reception” will be ours. We are reminded of how the crafty steward in the parable ensured his future.

In the mind of Luke, the friends we should be making are the poor and needy who will be on our side before God’s judgement seat because we had “invested” our wealth in them. As we read in Matthew: “As often as you did it to the least of these my brothers and sisters, you did it to me” (Matt 25:40).

Earlier we saw a good example of a man who had made so much money out of his harvest that he sat back to enjoy the rest of his life - which ended that very night. That is not the way to “make friends” with one’s material goods. In one sense there is nothing wrong with having a lot of money. It is how we use it that is the question.

“If you can trust a man in little things, you can also trust him in greater.” In other words, if we can be trusted with the material goods that come into our lives and use them to build the Kingdom of God, to create a more just and equitable society, then we can be trusted with something much greater, to live forever face to face with our God.

“If you cannot be trusted with elusive wealth, who will trust you with that which lasts?” And again, “If you have not been trustworthy with someone else’s money, who will give you what is your own?” And that reminds us that the material goods that come into our lives (no matter how they may have been acquired) do not belong absolutely to us. Everything on this earth belongs to all. We are only the stewards of what has come into our possession and we will be judged on how we make use of it. On our use will depend to a large extent our receiving the one thing that will really become our own, the unending happiness that God wishes us to have in company with him.

That leads obviously to the next warning that we cannot be at the same time give ourselves totally to God and become slaves of money and the material. We saw that in the case of the rich man who wanted to follow Jesus. He was the slave of his possessions and so could not surrender his life to Jesus. Many of us think we can and we try to compromise but, to give ourselves to God completely, we must become free of the lure of money and the acquisition of material things. It does not mean we do not have money or material things but what we do have is ultimately used only for God’s love and service and the love and service of our brothers and sisters.

On hearing all this, the Pharisees, whom Luke calls “avaricious”, mocked Jesus for what they felt was unrealistic idealism. There are many today who would echo their views but those who have taken Jesus’ words to heart know that what he says is true. We have seen that in the lives of people like Mother Teresa and Dorothy Day among others. I believe that Princess Diana, with all her money and fame and luxurious living knew she did not have something precious that Mother Teresa had found - the freedom to give and share her whole self with the destitute.

“What man thinks important, God holds in contempt.” The opposite is also true. On which side do I find myself?

Week 32 | Monday

Wisdom 1:1-7; Luke 17:1-6

Today we go back to the Old Testament and during the whole of this week our readings are from the Book of Wisdom. This is one of the later books in the Bible and, unlike most of the others, was written in Greek rather than Hebrew. It dates from only about 100 BC and was written in Alexandria, a centre of Hellenism on the north coast of Egypt. It is one of the so-called deutero-canonical books, not part of the Jewish Bible nor recognised as part of the Bible by most Protestant churches (although some non-Catholic bibles may include it in a section of ‘apocrypha’). It was used by the Fathers of the Church from the second century AD, and despite some hesitation and opposition, notably from St Jerome, was recognised as being inspired in just the same way as the books of the Hebrew canon.

The name of the author is not known but he was a member of the Jewish community at Alexandria in Egypt. Alexandria was the second city of the Roman Empire at this time. He wrote in Greek but following a Hebrew verse style. In order to give greater credence to his statements, he puts them in the mouth of Solomon, renowned for his wisdom but who lived long before this book was written. Throughout, the author shows himself deeply familiar with the earlier Old Testament writings.

His main purpose in writing was to give encouragement to his fellow-Jews during a time of great suffering and oppression, not least from apostate fellow-Jews. The first 10 chapters prepare us for the fuller teachings of Christ and his church. And many passages from this part of the book, especially 3:1-8, are used by the church in her liturgy.

The opening reading today is an evaluation of Wisdom as an essential factor in our lives.

Love uprightness you who are rulers on earth,
be properly disposed towards the Lord
and seek him in simplicity of heart;
for he will be found by those who do not put him to the test
revealing himself to those who do not mistrust him.

‘Uprightness’, also translated as ‘justice’ or ‘righteousness’ (from the Greek dikaiosune, dikaiosunh) exists when there is perfect harmony in both thought and deed with the known will of God as expressed in the Law or in the injunctions of one’s conscience. We see this in Jesus as he prays in the garden to his Father: “Not my will but yours be done.” Perfect uprightness then is when God’s will and mine are in such harmony that I not only submit my will to God’s but where both wills totally coincide. I want what God wants.

The author speaks to the ‘rulers on earth’. Later on in the book, he will infer that he is Solomon, renowned for his wisdom, speaking to his fellow-kings. This, of course, is just a literary device. In fact, he is addressing his fellow Jews in Alexandria, who are threatened by the ‘unrighteousness’ of their Gentile neighbours.

‘Seek him in simplicity of heart’. ‘Seeking God’ in order to ‘find him’ is a recurrent admonition in both prophetic and wisdom literature. Another version of this is found in the Beatitudes, “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God” (Matt 5:8). And that is the meaning of ‘simplicity’ here. It does not imply ‘naivete’ but a vision that is clear and not cluttered by distorting factors.

‘Perverse thoughts, however, separate people from God,

and power, when put to the test, confounds the stupid. ‘

Perverse thoughts are the opposite of that simplicity of heart because they cut people off from God. And ‘power’ confounds the stupid. That is the power of God which, if challenged by rebellious acts, confounds the stupid because only the stupid would do such a thing. In the course of the book, the author will identify the power of God with God’s Spirit and Wisdom, which, for him, are interchangeable terms. In the Gospel, too, the ‘Reign of God’ about which Jesus put at the heart of his teaching is not the power of a secular ruler but the power of Wisdom.

“Wisdom will never enter the soul of a wrongdoer,
nor dwell in a body enslaved to sin.”

Wisdom and sin are incompatible. No truly wise person, whose wisdom comes from God, who is Wisdom, can be in conflict with God. A person who deliberately does what is wrong is closing his mind to true wisdom. Nor can wisdom dwell in a body enslaved to sin. We do not hold that the body is evil in itself, a principle strongly held by the New Testament. However, it may become the instrument of sin and thus dominate the soul.

In John’s gospel Jesus says, “Everyone who lives in sin is the slave of sin (John 8:34). Paul, too, speaks of the struggle between the “flesh” and his “inner self” (Rom 7:14-24).

“For the holy spirit of instruction flees deceitfulness,
recoils from unintelligent thoughts,
is thwarted by the onset of vice.”

If we are under the influence of the ‘holy spirit’ of Wisdom we will avoid all deceitfulness, which is the direct opposite of the ‘simplicity of heart’, that transparency which is the path to ‘uprightness’. We will avoid all ‘unintelligent thoughts’, which, by definition are not guided by wisdom. On the other hand, wisdom is blocked once vice is allowed to take over.

“Wisdom is a spirit friendly to humanity,
though she will not let a blasphemer’s words go unpunished;
since God observes the very soul
and accurately surveys the heart,
listening to every word.

‘Wisdom’ is, of course, friendly to humanity because to be truly wise is to be in close harmony with God and that is what our whole being is made for. When our lives are guided by wisdom, then we become the kind of people that God intended us to be. As wisdom grows, we too grow more and more into his image.

On the other hand, Wisdom will “not let a blasphemer’s words go unpunished”. The blasphemer is one who speaks or acts in a way derogatory to God and all that God stands for. To behave in such a way is to alienate one from the God in whose image we are called to live. And there is no escape from this, because “God observes the very soul” and “accurately surveys the heart”.

For the word translated here ‘soul’, the author used the traditional word ‘kidneys’. In the ancient world, the kidneys - and not the heart - were considered the centre of the emotions and instinctive impulse. On the other hand, the ‘heart’ was the seat of the activity of intellect and will. Where we tend to say ‘heart and mind’, they would say ‘kidneys and heart’. Hence, in the ancient world, ‘heart’ and ‘kidneys’ were frequently linked to signify all the inner forces of the human person.

“For the spirit of the Lord fills the world,
and that which holds everything together knows every word said.”

In the concluding sentence of the reading we are told that the ‘spirit of the Lord’, another name for the ‘wisdom of God’ fills the whole world, because he created that world and, wherever creation is, God’s wisdom is immanent there, giving and it and conserving it in existence. It is that Wisdom/Spirit which “holds everything together” and hence “knows every word said”. Wisdom/Spirit links all things so intimately that He is immediately aware of every word uttered. The liturgy of Pentecost adapts this text to the ‘gift of tongues’, where, after the apostles were filled with the Holy Spirit, everyone could understand what they were saying.

God sees deep into our inmost self, into our heart and overhears all that we say. For God’s spirit, the source of wisdom, penetrates the whole world and knows all. Wisdom is our sharing in that knowledge and insight of God into things.

Both the transcendence and the immanence of God are implied in the whole passage. God’s transcendence means that he is far above and beyond all the capacity of the human mind to grasp. That is the meaning of the Incarnation, by which in the humanity of Jesus, we can get a dim glimpse of what God is like as expressed through Jesus’ way of living his human life. But the fullness of God’s being is something that we cannot grasp in the humanity of Jesus. That will have to wait for the Beatific Vision.

God’s immanence speaks of his deep presence in every created thing. This is not to be confused with pantheism which believes that everything is God. Some have come up with another term ‘panentheism’, God’s creative, transforming and loving presence in everything.

We need to keep both God’s transcendence and immanence in mind when we try to understand his nature but a full understanding will never be reached in this life.

Also, we must not confuse wisdom with intelligence or having encyclopaedic knowledge. It is not a question of knowing much. To know the Catechism of the Catholic Church by heart and to be able to enunciate every doctrinal statement with perfect accuracy does not constitute wisdom. Nor does impeccable orthodoxy equip one with wisdom.

Rather it is the ability to see all things in their proper relationship to each other and to see where we ourselves fit into the whole picture and, of course, to see it all in the light of God. As we go through life, it will be a constantly changing picture.

It is a gift which began to flow into us at Confirmation but it never ceases to call for a further deepening.

GOSPEL (Luke 17:1-6)

We move on to chapter 17 of Luke and today we have three separate sayings of Jesus which we find in different contexts of Matthew’s gospel.

The first is on the inevitability of scandals. Scandals are those actions or words which, literally, cause people to trip up and fall. Here they refer to words or actions which become obstacles preventing or making it more difficult for people to believe in and accept Christ and the Gospel.

These things are inevitable, Jesus says, but it is tragic for those who are responsible. It is a terrible thing to come between a person and the call of Christ, to be the effective agent for blocking a person coming to know and love Christ and his Way. It would be better for the scandal-causer to be thrown into the sea with a millstone round his neck. The “little ones” can refer either to those who are young and innocent or those who are frail in their Christian faith.

In recent years our newspapers have reported many “scandals” on the part of Catholic leaders - bishops, priests, brothers and sisters. It is difficult to say how many people’s faith was weakened by these events but it is likely that they were enough to make some less committed people experience a sense of disillusionment so that they abandoned the Church.

In many cases, there was probably no scandal in the strict sense but simply failings due to human frailty. In other cases, especially where the young or the innocent were abused or led astray, real scandal and prolonged harm was certainly present.

Scandal in the Gospel sense and in the tabloid sense are not quite the same and we should be careful to distinguish them. Jesus himself caused “scandal” among some of the religious leaders because he failed to observe certain rituals. This is known as “pharisaical” scandal or hypocritical scandal. We Catholics can certainly be guilty of this kind of false scandal and certainly the media at times, for purposes of sensationalism, can blow up certain trivial matters in a particularly obnoxious “holier-than-thou” approach.

But it is not only people in public life who cause scandal. Parents, by their ambivalent, two-standard behaviour, can tell their children to behave in one way while they themselves act in a totally other way. Catholic parents and others in charge of the guidance of children (such as teachers) need to be particularly careful of being stumbling blocks to their children’s faith.

The second saying is about forgiveness and reconciliation and it is not unconnected with the question of scandal above. If a brother (or a sister), that is, a fellow-Christian is clearly in the wrong, he should be corrected. And, if he clearly repents, then he is to be forgiven. Even if he commits the same offence any number of times and each time expresses sincere sorrow, he is to be forgiven.

This is not to say that a person can keep doing wrong and expect forgiveness simply by saying he is sorry. Some kind of controlling action may have to be taken. This is especially the case where the person is not in control of himself, which could be the case with someone who is an alcoholic, a drug addict, a sex abuser or the victim of some other compulsive behaviour. But even here, punishment alone cannot be a satisfactory solution but every effort must be made to heal and rehabilitate.

As Christians, the whole thrust of our actions is for reconciliation and not judgement and condemnation. We need to remember the teaching about God’s love for the sinner in the parables of the lost sheep, the lost coin and the lost son (Luke chap. 15).

The third saying is about faith, that is, deep trust in God. The apostles asked Jesus to increase their faith. This may be seen in the context of the warning about scandal and the requirement to forgive indefinitely. He told them that, if they had faith the size of a tiny mustard seed, they could order a sycamore tree to be uprooted and transplanted in the sea and it would happen.

Perhaps an area where we need a strong trust is in trying to rehabilitate both the givers and the victims of scandal and certainly we need faith if we are to be able sincerely to forgive again and again those who have hurt us or others. But true forgiveness is not the simple writing off of a wrongdoing but taking the necessary steps to restore a status quo of harmony and peace and mutual love and respect. It can take a long time.

Week 32 | Tuesday

FIRST READING (Wisdom 2:23-3:9)

Here is a lovely and magnificent passage which is often read during requiem Masses and which we also read on November 2, All Souls Day. It speaks about death and immortality and is full of hope.

“God created human beings to be immortal, he made them as an image of his own nature.”

“Let us make man in our own image”, God says in the opening chapter of the Book of Genesis (Gen 1:26). There the meaning was primarily that humanity was given responsibility to manage the rest of creation and to live in truth and love. But here the emphasis is on God’s eternal nature which God intended to share with all human beings.

That immortality was called into question by death which came into the world “through Satan’s envy”, as if to say, that our First Parents were tempted to sin because of Satan’s envy at their sharing in God’s immortality, something he himself had forfeited by his disobedience (cf. Rev 12:9; 20:2). All those who submit themselves to Satan’s deceitful guidance will meet the same fate.”The devil brought death to man from the beginning, and has never based himself on truth; the truth is not in him” (John 8:44). The ‘death’ that Satan brings here is primarily spiritual death, the eternal alienation from God, of which physical death is one of its consequences.

“But the souls of the upright are in the hands of God, and no torment can touch them.”

By contrast, the fate of the ‘upright’, those who are full conformed in every way to the will of God, are under his special protection and “no torment can touch them”.

In practice, when people die - even good people - it does not, on the surface, look like that.”To the unenlightened they appeared to die, their departure was regarded as a disaster, their leaving us like an annihilation”. Even when good and saintly people leave us, it is regarded as a tragedy and a blow not only to us but to them.”What did they do to be taken away like this?”

But, where the truly good are concerned, the reality is quite different. In fact, in death “they are at peace.” It is not only that all negative elements have been removed from their life but that they are in a state of security and total happiness under the protection of and in their intimacy with God. As the Third Eucharistic Prayer reads in speaking of the dead: “There we hope to share in your glory when every tear will be wiped away. On that day we shall see you, our God, as you are.”

Their death seemed like a form of punishment, the denial of the gift of life but, in fact, “their hope was rich with immortality”. For a Christian, faith is coupled with hope, a confident hope of being one day reunited forever with Christ our Lord. That hope is for immortality (in the Greek, athanasia). Strangely, this is the first appearance of the term in this late book of the Old Testament. For the Greeks, it was a familiar term meaning either a remembrance that would never die or immortality of the soul. Here it is clearly used in the second sense and, more specifically, speaks of a blessed immortality in close companionship with God as the reward for a life of uprightness, a life lived according to God’s will. This was the hope of the Psalmist who could not reconcile himself to losing his friendship with God through death: “My heart is glad and my soul rejoices. because you will not abandon my soul to the nether world, nor will you suffer your faithful one to undergo corruption” (Ps 16:9-10). In Old Testament times, the fate of all was to be confined forever to this nether world, called Sheol. The author of Wisdom has a much more hope-filled attitude which makes the Psalmist’s prayer a reality for all the upright.

In fact, for the upright the pain of death is only a slight tap on the wrist, compared to the blessings that are in store on the far side.”God was putting them to the test and has proved them worthy to be with him”. Sorrow and pain are the ways in which God tests and purifies the upright.”God chastises those whom he loves.”

“He has tested them like gold in a furnace, and accepted them as a perfect burnt offering.” One can understand how those who do evil come upon bad times. It is more difficult to understand why the good should suffer. But, as the writer says, suffering in the case of the good has a purifying effect. The image is that of the holocaust, in which the victim is completely consumed by fire. And, by being put in fire, all impurities are removed from the newly mined gold. Even Jesus himself, the very Son of God, was so tested and so entered his glory.

“At their time of visitation, they will shine out; as sparks run through the stubble, so will they.”

‘Visitation’ here expresses God’s loving judgement on those who have been faithful to him. (But, later in the book, the same term is used for the punishment of the wicked at God’s final judgement.)

The image of sparks running through the stubble, left over after the cutting of the grain, is used in many biblical passage and symbolises the effects of God’s avenging anger or of Israel’s revenge on its enemies. Here it is used slightly differently, perhaps to mean the participation of the glorified upright in the elimination of evil, preceding the establishing of the kingdom of God, of which they are striking evidence. And so “they will judge nations, rule over peoples, and the Lord will be their king for ever.” Obviously, they will judge the nations not on the same level as God. But their very uprightness will stand in sharp contrast with those who did not follow God’s will in their lives.

Finally, “those who trust in him will understand the truth, those who are faithful will live with him in love.” Those who fully committed themselves in faith and trust to God’s will in their lives will, after death, know that they were indeed walking the way of truth, the way of integrity and wholeness which they have now achieved. They will also “live with God in love”. A life of faith in Christ and his Way is not possible without also being a life of love - love for God, love for others, love for oneself. In death they will truly know and be totally taken up into the God who is Love. This is Heaven!

It is for us, then, to ready ourselves so that our death too will simply be the gateway to perfect happiness and union with God. We make ready for that time by each day seeking and finding God in every person and in every experience.

GOSPEL (Luke 17:7-10)

Another warning from Luke today (and one which is only found in this gospel) about complacency. As we read this parable we must be careful - as with many of the others - not to confuse matters by dragging in issues which are anachronistic.

Jesus asks if we had a slave who had spent the day working in the fields, would we invite him to sit down, have his supper and take a good rest? Or would we not rather tell him first to prepare his master’s supper and, after the master had eaten his fill, only then would the slave be able to eat and rest? Would we even express gratitude to a servant who was only doing what was expected of him?

Here, let us forget current ideas about union rules and democracy and what have you! No one in those times, either an employer or a slave, would have thought of questioning what Jesus is saying. At the same time, we might remember Jesus saying that watchful servants will be welcomed by their master who will make them sit down and will wait personally on them (Luke 12:37) and that Jesus washed his disciples’ feet as an example of service.

What we are dealing with here is our relationship with God. The point Jesus is making is that God need never be grateful to us for anything we do for him. No matter how much we do for him, we can never put him in our debt. Everything we give to God (or to God through others) is simply giving back to him a small portion of what he has already given us. It is well said in Preface IV for Masses on Weekdays: “You have no need of our praise, yet our desire to thank you is itself your gift. Our prayer of thanksgiving adds nothing to your greatness, but makes us grow in your grace.”

God can never be in our debt. He can never be under any obligation to us. Perhaps that is what some of the Pharisees thought. They felt that, because they kept the Law perfectly, God owed them salvation. We see that in the scene of the Pharisee and the tax collector praying in the Temple, where the Pharisee’s prayer gives the impression that God should be deeply grateful, among so many negligent people, to have such a good person as him.

We can do the same thing ourselves when, for instance, we think that by saying certain prayers or performing certain acts (novenas, indulgences, pilgrimages, etc) God should jump to attention and do what we are telling him to do, to give us what we are asking for.

All our living out of the Gospel is not a compliment paid to God. On the contrary, we can never be grateful enough to him for showing us the way to truth, love, freedom and happiness which Jesus taught us and for giving us the grace to walk his Way. With God, all our giving is only a partial giving back.

Week 32 | Wednesday

FIRST READING (Wisdom 6:2-11)

Today we enter a part of the book which deals with Solomon and his quest for wisdom. As mentioned, the author, as a literary device (quite common in his day), presents his work as that of King Solomon, the son of David, who had died centuries previously.

Unlike the beginning of Monday’s reading where the author seemed to be addressing kings and rulers but was in fact speaking to his fellow-Jews in Alexandria, today the words are addressed to kings with warnings on how to fulfil their responsibilities. It is a warning that their power is not something to be taken for granted or sought for its own sake. He speaks to those “who govern great populations” and who are “taking pride in your hosts of subject nations”. It was an age of empires, with one succeeding the other as each one toppled.

Of course, we need to remember that what applies to them also applies to all who are in positions of authority and responsibility over others, even if on a much lower scale.

Rulers need to remember that all power emanates from God.”Sovereignty is given to you by the Lord.” The doctrine of the divine origin of power had already been variously asserted in Scripture with regard to Israel’s kings. Here the author extends its application to include all rulers whatsoever, believing or non-believing. However great the trappings with which they are surrounded, they are merely ‘servants’ of God’s overall sovereignty. It is God who will look closely at everything they do and analyse their secret intentions and in the end pass judgement on their record.

Many, he implies, abused their power (and many still do) and will face severe punishment. It will be too bad for them, as servants of the King of kings, if they have not ruled with justice or followed the law - whether that is the Mosaic law or any legal code which is based on the natural law recognised by all and interpreted by conscience. As Paul comments in his Letter to the Romans: “When the gentiles who do not have the Law, keep it as by instinct, these men, although without the Law, serve as a law for themselves.” It is the part of his Letter where he asserts that the gentiles, even though deprived of the guidance of the Jewish Law, have enough evidence from the world around them to make sound moral judgements.

Kings and leaders who do not follow the will of God by observing enacted laws of their peoples will have a swift and terrible judgement. In the Old Testament, even people like Moses, King David and King Hezekiah met with severe punishment. Moses was not allowed to bring his people into the Promised Land. David saw his son and heir killed by his own soldiers. Hezekiah would have all his royal property take off to Babylon.

The higher a person’s rank, the greater their responsibility and thus the greater the punishment when they step out of line.”On the highly placed a ruthless judgement falls.” As the Gospel says, from those to whom more is given more is expected. Their resources of the rulers are greater, so their responsibility is greater and hence their accountability is all the more.

However, those at the bottom of the social ladder will be treated more tolerantly. They will be “pardoned, out of pity”. The poor will be pardoned “out of mercy” partly because of ignorance, illiteracy and perhaps oppressive conditions which might drive them to desperate measures to survive. If they stole something, it was probably because they had nothing to eat for themselves and their family. When kings steal, they reduce others to poverty.

And God is in awe of no king, however powerful, however extensive the territories over which he rules. He is the Maker of all - great and small alike and has equal power over all of them. Hence, “a searching trial awaits those who wield power.”

Concluding on a more positive note, rulers are encouraged to “learn wisdom” so that they may not fall into error. Wisdom, not power and wealth, is the most precious thing they can have. Solomon was praised by God for asking for wisdom rather than for power, wealth or the destruction of his enemies.”Those who in holiness observe holy things will be adjudged holy.” That is, those who faithfully obey the will of God will be recognised as ‘holy ones’ at the judgement. This applies to king and commoner alike. True wisdom, true insight into the meaning of life and into the relationships that govern people’s interaction is what will keep them on the paths of goodness and justice.

If only they will listen to what the author has to say about Wisdom, they will learn what the need most to know as just rulers.

All of us are in some way in positions of some authority, positions of responsibility often involving other people. It is important for us to realise that authority does not give us the right to claim special privileges over others, still less to abuse or manipulate people for our own ends.

On the contrary it imposes on us a serious responsibility to empower others, to help them generate their potential to the fullest. The higher our position of authority the greater is the need for us to be at the disposal of those committed to our charge. The higher we are the more we need to serve. Like Jesus, we are all called to serve and not to be served.

GOSPEL (Luke 17:11-19)

This story of Jesus’ compassion is peculiar to Luke.

We are told that Jesus was travelling on the borders of Galilee, the northern province of Palestine, and Samaria, which lies between Galilee and the southern province of Judea. Jesus is making for the Jordan valley on his way south to Jericho, one of his last stops before reaching his final destination in Jerusalem.

Just as he entered a village he was met by ten lepers (it does not specify whether they were men or women). As lepers they were not allowed to come in close proximity with other people because it was (rightly) known that the condition could be transmitted to others by physical contact, although it needed to be fairly prolonged contact. We remember how the famous Fr Damien, the Apostle to the Lepers, eventually contracted the disease through his ministering to a colony of lepers in Hawaii.

Because of their dreaded disease, such people were literally outcasts condemned to live their lives on the fringes of society. The tragedy is that, given the limited medical knowledge of the times, many such people were almost certainly not suffering from leprosy at all but from some other non-contagious but perhaps chronic skin disease.

So, calling Jesus from a safe distance, they cried out: “Jesus, Master, have compassion on us!”

Jesus simply told them to go and show themselves to the priests. And, while they were on their way, they were all cured. Presumably they continued on their way to see the priests who would give them an official declaration of being “clean” so that they could once again legitimately return to life in society. A major element of their healing was their re-integration into society.

Just one of the cured lepers then came back to Jesus “praising God in a loud voice” and in deep gratitude fell at the feet of Jesus.

“This man was a Samaritan.” The words are loaded with meaning. For it is presumed that the rest were Jews. In the first place, Jews and Samaritans could not stand each other and the Jews tended to look down on the Samaritans as ungodly and unclean. But, in the misfortune of their leprosy, these Jews and Samaritans, rejected by both their own peoples, found common support in each other’s company.

But, now that they are cured, only one of them comes to say thanks and he is still - in the eyes of the Jews - an outcast.

Jesus, looking around at the Jews in his company, expresses surprise that ten were made clean but only one came back to give thanks and he was a despised foreigner. This unexpected action is also reflected in another of Luke’s stories, which we reflected on earlier, that of the so-called “good Samaritan”. Here is another good Samaritan. (And there is a third, of course - the woman who features prominently in John’s gospel).

To the man Jesus says, “Stand up and go your way; your faith has made you whole again.” That “stand up” or “rise up”, which Jesus often uses with those he heals, has echoes of resurrection and entry into new life, a life of wholeness brought about by the man’s trust in Jesus and his acknowledgment of the source of his healing.

In the context of Luke’s gospel, the story prepares us for developments in the growth of the early Church, described in Luke’s Acts of the Apostles. For, as the early Christians (all Jews) flee from persecution in Jerusalem, the people of Samaria are among the first to accept Jesus as Lord and to become followers of the Gospel, while many of the Jews in Jerusalem remain closed to Jesus’ message and call.

We, too, must never give in to a temptation to exclude any people as possible followers of Christ. We must be ready to reach out to all, even the most unlikely. None must be treated as outsiders or untouchables, even those who show themselves extremely hostile to the Gospel.

And while there may not be any real lepers in our own society, today is an occasion for us to reflect on who could be regarded as lepers, outsiders, outcasts, and untouchables among us at the present time. And to ask whether I personally treat any person as an outsider in my home, in my work, in other places where I meet people. Such exclusion is totally contrary to what we celebrate in the Eucharist.

Week 32 | Thursday

FIRST READING (Wisdom 7:22-8:1)

Today’s passage is a hymn to Wisdom. It reflects much of Greek philosophical influence affecting the Jewish author. He treats Wisdom as a person and gives his own version of earlier personifications. In so far as Wisdom is identified with God as its origin, we might rephrase John to say that “in the beginning there was Wisdom and the Wisdom was with God and the Wisdom was God”.

The writer describes both the nature and origin of Wisdom and begins by listing 21 attributes of Wisdom. Borrowing freely from the vocabulary of Greek philosophy, the author next points out the various characteristics of Wisdom and concludes by identifying it with divine providence - in the last sentence of our reading.

The eulogy begins with a listing of 21 attributes of Wisdom, divided into three sets of seven each, that is, the multiplication of seven (for perfection) by three (for divinity). It is, in the thinking of the time, the most perfect of perfect numbers. The attributes are set out as follows so that each one can be looked at and considered separately. (Alternative translations from the New American Bible are given in parentheses for a number of attributes.)

For within Wisdom is a spirit

intelligent

holy

unique

manifold

subtle

mobile (or agile)

incisive (or clear)

unsullied (or unstained)

lucid (or certain)

invulnerable

benevolent (or loving the good)

shrewd (or keen)

irresistible (or unhampered)

beneficent

friendly to other people (or kindly)

steadfast (or firm)

dependable (or secure)

unperturbed (or tranquil)

almighty

all-surveying (or all-seeing)

penetrating all intelligent, pure and most subtle of spirits

(or pervading all spirits, be they intelligent, pure and very subtle)

There then follow some other attributes of Wisdom:

She is quicker to move than any other movement.

She is so pure, she pervades and permeates all things. Wisdom is totally devoid of any deception or distortion; she provides a clear vision which “pervades and permeates all things”.

She is a breath of the power of God, “a pure emanation of the glory of the Almighty”. The Spirit of God is also described as a movement of air - a ‘breath’ or a ‘wind’. Speaking to Nicodemus Jesus said: “The wind blows where it will. so it is with everyone begotten of the Spirit” (John 3:8), where there is a play on the word pneuma, meaning both ‘spirit’ and ‘wind’. Similarly at Pentecost the coming of the Spirit is accompanied by a wind blowing through the place where the disciples are gathered. Similarly, on the cross Jesus’ death is described as giving out the pneuma - which can be both his final breath and also his Spirit.”Then Jesus bowed his head, and handed over his Spirit/breath (pneuma)” (John 19:30) - Pentecost on the cross.

The ‘glory of the Almighty’ is the ‘eternal light’ that is God. In the Old Testament God is never called ‘light’. Some earlier texts already hinted at the concept of a transcendent light emanating from God, illuminating the faithful or his nation, being the radiance of his glory, or residing with him but it will only be in the First Letter of John that we read explicitly “God is light” (1 John 1:5). Jesus himself will say virtually the same thing: “I AM the Light of the World” (John 8:12).

Wisdom is a reflection of the eternal light of God, “an untarnished mirror of God’s active power and the image of his goodness”. When we are possessed by true wisdom we are already in touch with God, with his power which is his love and with his goodness.

There is a loftiness and exclusiveness about Wisdom, for she is unique.”Although she is alone, she can do everything.” Though herself unchanging and unchangeable, she changes the world through her insight and unending creativity.

In generation after generation she has passed into the lives of good people, making them “into God’s friends and prophets”. In the Old Testament such friends were Abraham and Moses. Jesus, as the Son of God, called his disciples his friends. Prophets include not only the great prophets and inspired scribes, but all who, by their holy life and intimacy with God, penetrate into the knowledge of his will and his mysteries, and so become his authorised ‘interpreters’ to enlighten their fellows. Among these will be the many outstanding spiritual and theological writers and preachers who have given new insights into living with God and for God.

“God loves only those who dwell with Wisdom.” Of course, God, who is Love, extends that love infinitely and equally to every single person and thing he has created. It is never withdrawn. But obviously, there is a special relationship with those who open their hearts and respond totally to the Love extended to them and who, in turn, pass that Love on to all those who come into their lives.

There is a brightness to Wisdom that is unique.”More splendid than the sun, she outshines all the constellations.” Since those words were written, we know so much more about the enormity of the constellations and the galaxies and yet the statement remains perfectly valid.”Compared with light, she takes first place, for light must yield to night.” Nothing can avail against Wisdom, which contains all Truth, Goodness and Beauty.

And, at the end, Wisdom is linked with the loving Providence of God which governs our world: “She reaches from one end of the world to the other and governs the whole world for its good.” The attributes that Paul gives to love in his famous passage in his First Letter to the Corinthians can also be applied to Wisdom. Divine Wisdom embraces both Truth and Love.

To be a friend of God, then, is to share his Wisdom, that is, to see and understand reality as he does. This is the most precious thing we can have in life for it gives meaning and direction to everything that we experience. It is to live in a light that is never extinguished and against which evil is impotent.

Let us pray today for this wisdom that will guide our lives and bring us the happiness, peace and security which we constantly seek.

GOSPEL (Luke 17:20-25)

Jesus was asked by some Pharisees when the Kingdom of God would come.

In their mind, it was a definitive time that would be suddenly realised by the arrival of a triumphant Messiah-King. Jesus says it is not going to be like that at all. The Kingdom cannot be found by looking around for telltale signs so that you can say it is ‘here’ or ‘there’.

No, says Jesus, “the reign of God is already in your midst”. In other words, it is right in front of them. It is first of all in the very person of Jesus, who is the embodiment of the God’s Reign. He is the Messiah-King. He is the living incarnation of God’s loving power revealed in his authoritative teaching, in his many healings of the sick, in his freeing of those from the power of evil spirits and in his compassion for the sinner and the outcast. All are clear evidence of the reign of God “in their midst”.

In every age, there are people who get worked up about the “final coming of Christ”. The recent end of the millennium was such a time. But, instead of focusing on a date in the calendar we should be focusing on the realities of our everyday lives where, to those with eyes to see, the reign of God can easily be discerned working in other people’s lives and in our own. Wherever people are reflecting in their lives the vision of life, the values that Jesus revealed to us, the Kingdom is there. And such people are not confined to the Church. They can be and are found everywhere.

Jesus then turns to his disciples telling them they will long to see the “one day of the Son of Man” but will not see it. In the very early Church many were convinced that Jesus would make his final coming in their own lifetime. It is likely that, from time to time, certain events were interpreted as signs of that final coming. People were saying that “he is to found in this place or that”. But by the time Luke’s gospel was written most of that first generation of Christians had died and there was still no sign of Jesus’ coming. The ‘days’ following his expected coming may have all the more been longed for during times of severe persecution when they looked for relief and help from their pain. An anxiety reflected in the story of the disciples’ trying to wake a sleeping Jesus while their boat is threatened by mountainous seas (Mark 4:35-41).

Jesus says that, when his day does come, it will “be like the lightning that flashes from one end of the sky to the other”. It will be both sudden and everywhere. In the meantime, Jesus “must suffer much and be rejected by the present age”. Words which clearly refer to his own suffering and death but which can also be applied to the whole Risen Christ, including the Church, his risen Body, down to our own age.

So, on the one hand, the reign of God is already here among us and we need look no further than the daily experiences of our own lives to know and experience the power and presence of Jesus. On the other hand, the time of that final coming which will “wipe every tear from our eyes” and be the end of all suffering and rejection is not for us to decide - nor to be anxious about.

Week 32 | Friday

FIRST READING (Wisdom 13:1-9)

Today the author mocks those who fail to find God’s presence in the world around them. Instead, they turn to idolatry and make gods of the things of nature. It is one thing to see God in everything and another to make anything a god, an object of worship. He attacks three forms of idolatry, only the first of which is dealt with in today’s reading - the divinisation of natural forces and heavenly bodies; the worship of man-made idols; the worship of animals.

The author calls “vain” all those who are not aware of the real God in the world around them. ‘Vain’ or ‘empty’ was an epithet often used of false gods. Those who devote themselves to such ‘vanities’ are ‘vain’ themselves. They do not seem to be able to discover “Him-who-is” in all the good things around them nor, by studying the wonderful works of nature, have they been able to become aware of their Designer or Artificer. ‘Him-who-is’ becomes for later Christian philosophers ‘Pure Being’, the unique characteristic of God as source of all that comes to be.

Other natural phenomena, instead of leading them to their Maker, are themselves made into gods - fire, wind, the constellations, the power of the sea, the sun and the moon (‘heaven’s lamps’). All these are said to govern the world. People have become hypnotised by their beauty (and sometimes frightened by their power) and so divinised them without realising how much greater their Maker must be as the original Source of such beauty and power. In terms borrowed from the Greek philosophers and to be taken up by Christian philosophers and theologians of a later age, the author tells us that greatness and beauty of all things gives us an analogy, that is, a faint image of the greatness and beauty of the Origin of all things.

The Old Testament had praised the power and majesty of the creating God but did not talk of the beauty of the world as a work of art. The author reveals a Greek touch here in his aesthetic sensitivity of God as artist.

And, if it is the power in these phenomena that has impressed them, why can they not come to the conclusion that He who made all these things must be so much more powerful? If the things of the world around us can dazzle us with their beauty, what must their Maker be like? “Since through the grandeur and beauty of the creatures we may, by analogy, contemplate their Author.”

However, compared to those who have made gods of human artefacts of gold and silver (dealt with in the following section of the chapter), such people may be less guilty. They are to be commended for their search of God and their eagerness to find him. The author is sympathetic to these people’s problems. They are in search of God, of the ultimate source of meaning, but go astray by becoming dazzled by the beauty of what they see. In a sense, they cannot see the whole forest because of the beauty of this or that tree.

On the other hand, they are not without blame. If they are clever enough to make a study of the world in which they live, how come they have been so slow to find the Master that is behind all? He faults them for having proceeded so far in intellectual speculation and yet failed to come to an awareness of the God who alone gives meaning to all they see.

Later Paul in his Letter to the Romans will also criticise those who, though without the help of revelation, fail to find God in the world around them and create gods out of material things. Later still, St Ignatius Loyola in the final contemplation of his Spiritual Exercises will urge the retreatant to consider that the truth and beauty of the things around him can be but the palest shadow of their Source. They are the signs not only of his truth and beauty but also of his overwhelming love for us.

We, too, can be so caught up in things that we fail to see through them to the Source behind. As Teilhard de Chardin said, we live in a milieu divin (a ‘divine milieu’), in a world where everything is touched by God. He is the very air we breathe. It is a gift and a great source of peace to be consciously aware of this as we go through our day.”There lives the dearest freshness deep down things,” as the poet Gerard Manley Hopkins wrote.

GOSPEL (Luke 17:26-37)

Jesus is coming to the end of his public life. His passion and death is going to be a traumatic experience for his followers, which will take them by surprise and fill them with shock and alarm.

Later still but before Luke had put his gospel together, a cataclysm had overtaken Jerusalem when the city was laid siege to and utterly destroyed and the magnificent Temple with it. The disaster is commemorated in the arch in Rome erected to honour the Emperor Titus’ victory where one can see bas reliefs of the treasures of the Temple being carried off as loot.

Last of all, there is the end of all things when our world will be no more. The what or the how of that end is something we know nothing about.

In a sense, all three endings are included in Jesus’ warning today. His main lesson is for us to be ready and not to think that we can postpone our preparations. When the end strikes it will be already too late.

Jesus gives the examples of the time of the Flood when people ate and drank right up to the moment of disaster. (And we know from our newspapers how unprepared people can be when sudden floods and other sudden disasters strike.) Similarly in the days of Lot, people were leading their ordinary lives when fire and brimstone (was it an earthquake?) rained down on the wicked city of Sodom. Only Lot and his family, who had been previously warned, escaped. Almost every day we read in our papers of similar cataclysms.

When the “day of the Son of Man is revealed”, that is, when he comes at the end of time, it will be too late to take emergency measures. One will either be ready or not. If one is resting on the roof of one’s house (as was common at that time), don’t think of going down to save something. One person will be taken away and a companion left behind. The words seem to echo what happened at the fall of Jerusalem and are similar to all natural disasters where some are swept away and those next to them survive. In the context, the implication is that one goes to God and one does not.

These texts are not intended to fill us with fear and foreboding of a capricious God. They are timely advice not to be caught napping but to remain alert to meet the Lord. It is good advice not just for the end of our lives but for every day and every moment of every day. If I am always ready now, I will be ready then.

By living continuously and consciously in the presence of God, in that “divine milieu” of the Kingdom mentioned above, in the ever-present NOW, we are not going to be caught by surprise. Far from being afraid, we will look forward to the day with anticipation, leaving totally in God’s hands the hour of his call. In practice, too, that final call will not coincide with the end of our planet but with the moment when our individual life on this earth will come to its end. Of the inevitability of that end there is no doubt.

Week 32 | Saturday

FIRST READING (Wisdom 18:14-16,19:6-9)

Our final reading from Wisdom. It is full of poetical images, although underneath the beautiful language is the power of God that brings both life and death. The context is the liberation of the Israelites from their life of slavery in Egypt.

The reading opens with a beautiful image of “peaceful silence” covering the world which is in the darkness of night. Then from God’s heavenly throne his all-powerful Word leaps down. It is just up to this point that this sentence is used during the Christmas liturgy to express God’s entrance into our world through the Incarnation, made visible through the birth of Jesus.

The end of the sentence, however, is omitted: “[The Word leaps down] like a pitiless warrior into the heart of a land doomed to destruction”. In this context, it is a different “Word” that is being spoken of. It is the Word as the one who carries out God’s judgement on a sinful world. In this case, it is the sinful world of the Pharaoh’s Egypt which will not let the Israelites leave the country.

In the Book of Exodus, the massacre of the first-born, attributed to God himself and accompanied by the Destroying Angel, here in Wisdom becomes the work of the divine Word. The Word had already been represented as executing God’s sentences by, among others, Isaiah. This dramatic passage draws its inspiration from a verse in 1 Chronicles and possibly also from Homer (Iliad IV). In apocalyptic terms, the Word of Judgement prefigures, not the Incarnation of the Word in Jesus but the dreadful aspect of his Second Coming.

The massacre is then described when the Word of Judgement, carrying out God’s clear command, “like a sharp sword. filled the world with death” as the first-born of every Egyptian family was killed.

The author now moves on to the crossing of the Sea of Reeds (the ‘Red Sea’) as the Israelites fled from the Pharaoh and his armies. The author sees this action as part of a “new creation” as God manipulates the very elements of nature in leading his people out into a new world.

He describes the various wonders that took place when “the whole creation, submissive to your commands, had its very nature re-created”. To facilitate the crossing of the Sea of Reeds, the natural creation was re-organised or changed “so that you children should be preserved from harm”.

In Genesis we see the elements brought into an ordered creation. Here a similar phenomenon is now witnessed, but this time the extraordinary behaviour of air, land and water violates the order established by the Creator.

As a cloud, representing the protective presence of Yahweh hovered over them, dry land appeared, where just previously there had been water, and the sea became “an unimpeded way”, stormy waves became a green plain. A Palestinian midrash speaks, not only of abundant grass, but of fruit trees lining the road opened through the waters. Later rabbinical tradition enumerates ten miracles attending the crossing of the Red Sea.

Then, under the sheltering hand of God, the people crossed in safety, mesmerised by the amazing prodigies they were seeing. No wonder they were filled with joy and excitement, like horses released to pasture, skipping like lambs and singing the praises of God their liberator.

Underlying the reading is that God brings liberation to those who put their trust in him but destruction to those who violate his way. Jesus, too, as Simeon foretold in the Temple, would bring about both the rise and fall of many.

Jesus can be a source of life for all who walk his Way of Truth and Life or we can reject that Way, and opt for darkness and death.”He who is not with me is against me.” With Jesus, there is no half-way position, no fence-sitting, no neutrality.

GOSPEL (Luke 18:1-8)

One of the attributes attributed to Luke is that his is a “Gospel of Prayer”. We see Jesus praying in this gospel more than in the others and he gives more teaching about prayer.

Today Jesus tells a parable urging perseverance.”He told his disciples a parable about the necessity for them to pray always without becoming weary.” This is very much a theme in Paul’s letters (cf. Rom 1:10; 12:12; Eph 6:18; Col 1:3; 1 Thess 5:17; 2 Thess 1:11, etc. , and 2 Cor 4:1,16; Gal 6:9; Eph 3:13; 2 Thess 3:13).

The parable features a totally corrupt judge, who fears neither God nor man. It also features a widow, probably the most powerless, the most pitiful and least pitied of people in the society of those days. She has lost her husband, re-marriage is out of the question, she has lost the support of her own family and her husband’s family, and there is nothing comparable to social welfare for her to lean on.

As far as a corrupt judge is concerned, she can be ignored. She has neither power nor money (for bribing). But this widow is different. She is persistent and will not give up. Eventually, the judge, for his sheer peace of mind, settles in her favour.

If, Jesus concludes, a corrupt and ruthless judge can be moved by a helpless widow, what kind of response can we expect when we, his people, call out in our helplessness to our loving and compassionate God? “I tell you, he will give them swift justice.” That is, he will give them what is rightfully due to them.

But, says Jesus in a challenge which should make us sit up and take notice, “When the Son of Man comes, will he find any faith on earth?” Times of persecution are on the way - they have already begun as this gospel is written - and some will give up under pressure. They will not persevere in keeping close contact with God in prayer, finding him and his peace in the midst of their sufferings.

It is easy to pray when things are going well. It is often in times of pressure that we, too, give up praying when we need it most, when our faith is really being put to the test. We have to pray constantly and consistently. We should not be afraid to ask for what we believe we really need.

But then, if God is such a caring person, why should we have to pray to him at all? We need to keep praying, not for his sake but for our own. By doing so, we maintain an awareness that “by ourselves we can do nothing”.

Secondly, the more we pray, the closer we come to God. And, as we pray, what we ask for will gradually change. Ultimately what we want is what we need. And what we need is to bring our thinking, our dreams, our ambitions totally into line with God’s way of seeing things.

The problem is, as Jesus says at the end today, how many people will really be doing that when he comes looking for us? How often do I pray? How consistently do I ask? What do I ask for? What do I really want? Do I distinguish between what I want and what I really need? And do I really have that faith and trust in the loving providence of my God?

There is another and very indifferent interpretation of this passage. When we read this parable about perseverance, we usually think of it in these terms: God is the judge and we are the widow. This means we should persevere in pestering God until our needs are met.

But what happens if we turn that around and say that we are the judge and God is the widow? In some ways, this interpretation makes more sense. We, like the judge, are basically unjust. Sometimes we, too, have no fear of God; that is, we do not allow God to scare us into being good.

Similarly, like the judge we persist in refusing to listen to the cries of the poor all around us. But God is the persistent widow who will not go away. God keeps badgering us, refusing to accept as final our ‘No’ to love. God will persist until we render a just judgment, that is, until we let the goodness out, until we learn to love. *

In Genesis we are told we are made in the image and likeness of God. Perhaps our prayer could be: Dear God, Persevering One, make us more like you!

*This second interpretation of the parable comes from Melanie Svoboda SND, Review for Religious, Sept-Oct 1996

Week 33 | Monday

FIRST READING (1 Maccabees 1:10-15,41-43,54-57,62-63)

During this week we take readings from the First and Second Books of the Maccabees. These are among the latest of Old Testament writings. 1 Maccabees was originally written in Hebrew but we only have the Greek translation now; 2 Maccabees was written in Greek. They date from about 100 BC, not long before the birth of Christ. Although they deal with the same period of history, they are quite separate books by different authors. They are not part of the Jewish canon and are not included, except as “apocrypha”, in Protestant bibles.

The first book is mainly historical and covers events between 175 and 134 BC and a successful revolution by the Jews. The second book is less concerned about history and covers a shorter period than the first book. Our readings will alternate between the first and second books.

The period we are covering follows on the death of Alexander. As the opening of 1 Maccabees indicates, the territories conquered by Alexander were divided among his officers and noblemen, who appointed themselves kings in their own regions.

From these there emerged a “wicked offshoot”, Antiochus Epiphanes IV, son of King Antiochus (175-164 BC). He was the younger brother of Seleucus IV and son of Antiochus II. The royal epithet Epiphanes (‘who reveals himself in splendour’) indicates the king’s claim to be the earthly manifestation of the Greek god, Zeus. He had been among hostages handed over to the Romans by his father in 189 BC, after his defeat at Magnesia in Sipyle.

Antiochus IV became king in the 107th year of the “kingdom of the Greeks”. This refers to the Seleucid era which began in Syria in the autumn of 312 BC (when Antioch was supposed to have been founded) and in Babylonia in the following year, 311 BC.

It was at this point, according to 1 Maccabees, that a group of “renegades” (literally, “breakers of the Law”) emerged among the Israelites with the purpose of leading the people astray. They began urging the people to merge with the surrounding hellenistic peoples on the grounds that by separating themselves they had had nothing but trouble. They began making propaganda among their fellow-Jews urging them to break down the barriers that divided the Jews from the surrounding peoples.

This proposal met with a favourable response on the part of many and some of them approached Antiochus, who gave them the authority to practise gentile customs. One of the signs of change was the building of a gymnasium, which was a feature of every Greek city. Many of the Jews “disguised their circumcision” because men were always naked in the gymnasium and circumcision was peculiar only to the Jews. The nakedness which was no problem to the Greeks was a source of discomfort to the Jews (think of Adam and Eve in the garden after their sin). It is likely that other behaviour obnoxious to the Jews, such as homosexual behaviour, would also take place there. The statement that some “submitted to gentile rule as willing slaves of impiety” may even imply that some of the Jewish men and women practised prostitution.

The New Jerusalem Bible comments:

Religion, the Law and ancestral custom isolated the Jews as a foreign community inside the oriental world which had been unified and hellenised since Alexander’s conquest. Assimilation by the new culture offered material benefits, but could not be achieved without breaking down the barriers which safeguarded the integrity of the Jewish faith. At this point, the innovations were not yet identified with the idolatrous practices which the king was to impose seven years later, but they increased the opportunities for taking part in such rites; and here lies the underlying theme of the two books of Maccabees. This movement among the hellenising Jews was sure of support from Antiochus Epiphanes, a devotee of Greek culture.

Antiochus now began to reveal his real intentions. After invading Egypt and defeating Ptolemy its king, he moved against Judah and sacked Jerusalem. He rebuilt the City of David and filled it with Jews allied to his hellenising ways. He then issued a proclamation ordering all ethnic groups in his kingdom to renounce their customs and accept his religion.

Our reading picks up the story at this point. On the 15th day of Chislev in the year 145 of his dynasty, which corresponds to 8 December 167 BC, Antiochus erected the “abomination of desolation” in the Temple at Jerusalem. This was an altar to Baal Shamem or the Olympian god Zeus which was erected on the Jewish altar of holocausts in the temple. A greater and more humiliating sacrilege could not be imagined by any Israelite. (It was not unlike the French revolutionaries placing a naked woman as Venus on the high altar of Notre Dame cathedral in Paris.)

Altars to Antiochus’ gods were also erected in other towns of Judah and incense offered at the doors of houses and in the streets. Again, for the Jews, there was only one altar and that was in the temple. Incense too would only be used in temple liturgies. Books of the Law, meaning copies of the Pentateuch containing the Law, were seized and burnt.

However, not all the Jews accepted this situation. There were those who stood their ground and refused to comply. They would not eat food which they regarded as unclean.”They chose death rather than contamination by such fare or profanation of the holy covenant.” Many of these paid for their courageous resistance with their lives.”It was a truly dreadful retribution that visited Israel.” Once again, the suffering of the people is at least partly attributed to their own former sins.

It will be the beginning of a bitter struggle to preserve Jewish integrity in Antiochus’ kingdom.

As Christians we can face similar problems although they may vary a great deal in intensity. There are now strong pressures on us to conform to the prevailing cultures of our society which involve paying worship to various idols such as materialism, consumerism, sex (with its various “recreational” offshoots), success, status, power and the fashion of the moment.

Among Christians some have taken all this culture on board and subscribe to it as did some of the Israelites in our reading. Most of us would have to admit that we are infected in varying degrees. It is not easy to walk a truly Christian path through our societies and, if we do, we can expect criticism, resistance and abuse, even violence.

Like the Israelites, though not in exactly the same way, we need to keep away from everything that is unclean or tainted with falsehood, greed, hate or violence. The covenant we have made with the Lord is to follow his commandment of unconditional love at all times and with every person.

GOSPEL (Luke 18:35-43)

Here we have Luke’s version of the story of the blind man, called by Mark Bar-Timaeus, the son of Timaeus.

In Mark the story is strategically placed at the end of a long teaching section where Jesus’ disciples are slowly deepening their understanding of Jesus and his mission. The story, full of symbols, sums up all that has gone before. It is like a mini-gospel (cf. reflection for Thursday of Week 8).

In Luke the story has also a very significant positioning. It falls between two other stories, both about rich people. One was a highly religious man who was not able to accept Jesus’ condition that he share his wealth with the poor before becoming a disciple. The other is about a man who supposedly was anything but religious and yet, after meeting Jesus, gives away a large proportion of his wealth to the poor. Which of these was really blind?

In addition, the first story of a rich man is followed by the third prediction of Jesus’ suffering, death and resurrection, after which, says Luke, the disciples did not understand what Jesus was talking about.”They failed to comprehend what he was saying.” They, too, are blind.

As the story opens, we are told that Jesus was approaching Jericho. Jericho was a very ancient city, located about 8 km west of the River Jordan and about 25 km north-east of Jerusalem. In Jesus’ time, Jericho of the Old Testament was largely abandoned but a new city, south of the old one, had been built by Herod the Great. It was the last main stop for Jesus before arriving in Jerusalem.

In Mark’s version Jesus is leaving Jericho but here Luke has Jesus approaching the city. Mark has Jesus leaving Jericho on the way to Jerusalem and his passion, and the blind man becomes his follower. Luke has Jesus going into and through Jericho on the way to Jerusalem because he wants to bring in Zacchaeus (a man whose eyes are opened by Jesus), a story not mentioned by either Mark or Matthew.

The story begins with a blind man sitting beside the road begging. (In Matthew’s rather bald account, there are actually two blind men, cf. Matt 20:29-34.) As we have mentioned before, the ‘road’ is the Way to Jerusalem on which all of Jesus’ disciples must walk together with him. When the beggar hears that Jesus is passing by he begins to call out in a loud voice, “Jesus, Son of David, have compassion on me!” By addressing Jesus as ‘Son of David’ he implies Jesus’ role as Messiah-King.

The people tell him to keep quiet. A useless beggar like him has no right disturbing the Master. But the man ignores them and keeps crying out. (In this he reminds us of the persistent widow we read about the other day.) Now Jesus stops. If the man had not kept calling out, Jesus might not have heard him and might have passed forever out of his life. How often does that happen to me?

Jesus orders the man to be brought to him. Again, it is always through other people that we come to know Jesus - and sometimes it will be through me, and only through me, that others will come to know him. I may be the only link that a person has with Jesus. Something to think about. On the other hand, I may be the one person who blocks someone approaching Jesus and his Way. We saw earlier what happens to those who are a ‘scandal’, a stumbling block to Jesus.

“What do you want me to do for you?” Jesus asks. It is a question that he keeps asking me. How do I answer? Have my answers changed over the years? Today let me reflect what I really want from him. And ask him for it.

Now listen to this man’s response to Jesus’ question: “Lord, please let me see.” Of course, one might think, it was a natural response from a person who was blind. But, in a wider sense, so is each one of us. We all need to see. It is our poor sight that prevents us from knowing Jesus and seeing where he wants us to go. We could hardly make a better request.

Jesus immediately responds: “Receive your sight. Your faith has made you well, has healed and made you whole.” If only we too had the faith that would help us to see clearly!

And what did the man do when he could see? He became a follower of Jesus and gave glory to God. No longer blind, no longer a beggar, no longer by the road but on the road with Jesus. On the road - and Jesus is the Road, the Way - to Jerusalem and all that it means. That is the natural response for those who can really see.

Just before this (we did not have this reading) the rich man who wanted “eternal life” was not able to see and so could not accept Jesus’ invitation but tomorrow we will meet someone who did have his eyes opened and responded generously.

The story also applies to Jesus’ disciples who gradually will have their eyes opened too and then they will understand why Jesus had to suffer and die on his way to glory. They will understand that it was the uttermost proof of God’s love for each one of us.

Week 33 | Tuesday

FIRST READING (2 Maccabees 6:18-31)

For today’s and tomorrow’s readings we go to the Second Book of Maccabees. It is not a continuation of the first book and covers only part of the same period (180-161 BC) seen from a more religious, less historical, angle. However, chronologically speaking, today’s and tomorrow’s readings fit in here.

Today and tomorrow we will be reading of the heroic martyrdoms of people who refused to compromise what they regarded as fundamental principles of their Jewish faith and sacrificed their lives as martyrs. The story of Eleazar and of the mother and her seven sons, among the earliest models of “martyrdom”, were understandably very popular among the Christians of the early centuries. Written originally to encourage God’s people in time of persecution, they add gruesome details to the record of tortures and place long speeches in the mouths of the martyrs.

Today we read about Eleazar, who was one of the leading teachers of the Law. He was elderly and a man of great dignity and presence. When he was forced to eat a piece of pork, something completely forbidden by the Law, he spat it out, ready to die with honour than to live on in disgrace among his fellow-Jews.

Those who had known him for a long time and had the greatest respect for him wanted him to go through the motions of eating the forbidden food without actually breaking the Law rather than see him lose his life. They urged him, during the lengthy preparation of the ritual meal, to have a kind of meat brought, prepared by himself, which he could legally eat and just pretend to eat the meat prescribed by the king.

By availing of this help provided by friends, he could escape death. But Eleazar, having lived a life of total integrity since he was a boy and followed the Law with the utmost fidelity, told his friends to send him at once to Hades, the place of the dead. What his friends were suggesting might save his life, might not involve a literal breaking of the law but would have given the appearance that he had conformed to the demands of the idolatrous king. Not only the letter but the spirit of the Law had to be maintained. And then there were the effects it might have on others, especially the young and impressionable.

“Pretence does not befit our time of life,” he said to his well-meaning friends.”Many young people would suppose that Eleazar at the age of 90 had conformed to the foreigners’ way of life and, because I had played this part for the sake of a paltry brief spell of life, might themselves be led astray on my account. I should only bring defilement and disgrace on my old age.”

He might, by the suggested ruse, escape physical death but he would never escape from his accountability to God. By showing his readiness to die, he will prove himself worthy of his old age. In addition, he would leave behind an impressive example to the young “of how to make a good death, eagerly and generously, for the venerable and holy laws”.

He then proceeded to walk straight to the torture wheel on which he would be lashed. But those who just now had been encouraging him to save his life now turned against him. They thought his decision sheer madness.

But Eleazar, just before he died under his executioner’s blows, spoke his last words of testament: “The Lord whose knowledge is holy sees clearly that, though I might have escaped death, from awe of him I gladly endure these agonies of body under the lash, and that in my soul I am glad to suffer.”

In dying this way, he left a striking example of nobility and goodness not only for the young but for the greater part of the nation. He died both a hero and a martyr.

The lesson of this story is important in our age when so much attention is given to image. Appearing to be rich is more important than actually being rich. What people think about you is more important than what you really are. People go to great lengths for image, status, reputation, ‘face’. They surround themselves with the trappings of the consumerist society - the right car, the right house, the right mobile phone, the right restaurants, clothes, cosmetics, hair styles.

Sometimes, for the sake of ambition and “success”, they will not hesitate to compromise religion and morality. Eleazar’s lesson is not so much his bravery in the face of death but his integrity, his refusal to compromise on vital issues. With the help of his supporters, he could easily have escaped suffering and death. They thought he was mad not to do so.

For them it was only a question of a few pieces of meat; for Eleazar his loyalty to his God and his own conscience was at stake. He would not have been able to live with himself if he had followed their advice. There are some values which are more important than life itself. It is a lesson much needed in our time.

Origen and some of the Church Fathers, notably Ambrose, Gregory Nazianzen, Cyprian, praise Eleazar as a pre-Christian martyr. This narrative, like the next, which we will read tomorrow, is of the same literary type as many of the Acta of the martyrs.

Our Church should be proud that every single century since its foundation there have been people ready and willing to give their lives as an expression of loyalty to Jesus Christ and the way of life he stands for.

The word ‘martyr’ comes from a Greek word meaning ‘witness’. Not all of us will be required to die for our faith but it is absolutely certain that we are called on to give witness to Jesus Christ and his mission to build the Kingdom of God in the world, a Kingdom of Truth, Love, Fellowship, Justice, Freedom, Peace.

How do I give witness?

GOSPEL (Luke 19:1-10)

Today we have one of the most delightful stories of Luke and indeed of the whole Gospel. It follows immediately - and not by accident - after the healing of a blind man as Jesus enters the city of Jericho, to the northeast of Jerusalem.

The central figure is Zacchaeus, who, Luke tells us, was a chief tax collector and a rich man. This is the only reference in Scripture to a ‘chief tax collector’. It probably means he was responsible for a district or region with other tax collectors answerable to him. The region at this time was prosperous so more tax collectors were needed.

Knowing he was a chief tax collector it was hardly necessary to mention that he was wealthy. Tax collectors were studiously avoided and despised by their fellow-Jews. They made contracts with the Roman authorities to collect taxes and made sure that they got from the public what today we might call generous “commissions”. After all, it was a kind of business and they had to make a living. And, if an ordinary tax collector could do well, it is easy to imagine how much a chief tax collector might make. One commentator refers to him as a ‘creep’.

Apart from forcing people to part with their hard-earned money, they were seen as traitors to their own people by taking their money and giving it to the pagan Roman colonialists occupying their country. One can see how Jesus could cause great offence to the religious-minded by sitting down and eating with such ‘scum’.

Zacchaeus heard that Jesus was in town and he was very curious to see what Jesus was like. Already we have here an echo of yesterday’s story, because Zacchaeus too wants to see. However, at this stage, it seems to be only a kind of curiosity. He just wanted to get a glimpse of a person of whom he undoubtedly heard people talk. Maybe he had even heard that Jesus had a name for mixing with people like himself.

Because he was a small man (in more ways than one?), he could not see over the large crowd of people surrounding Jesus. So he ran on ahead and climbed into the branches of a sycamore tree to get a better look. A sycamore tree can grow to a height of 10 to 15 metres, with a short trunk and spreading branches and hence easy to climb and easily capable of carrying a grown man.

Zacchaeus wanted to see Jesus but he did not expect that Jesus would see him. He must have practically fallen out of the tree from surprise when he heard Jesus look in his direction and say, “Zacchaeus, hurry down. I want to stay in your house today.” What beautiful words! And yet it is a self-invitation that Jesus constantly extends to us. It is right there in our First Reading for today: “Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, then I will enter his house and dine with him and he with me” (Revelation 3:20). Is my house ready, is my door open to let him in?

Zacchaeus could hardly believe his ears. He rushed down and delightedly welcomed Jesus into his house. Immediately those around began to grumble.”He has gone to a sinner’s house as a guest.” Of all the people in Jericho, Jesus picks the house of the one person in the town who was regarded as a social and religious outcast.

But, as usual, Jesus sees beyond the public image to the real person. Zacchaeus may be a chief tax collector but he is ready to give half of his property to the poor and, if he has cheated anyone, he promises to pay them back four times what they lost. Fourfold restitution was demanded by Jewish law, but in one case only, the theft of a sheep (Exodus 21:37). Roman law demanded such restitution from all convicted thieves. Zacchaeus, however, promises to pay in any case of injustice for which he has been responsible.

Some commentators read the passage as saying that Zacchaeus has already been making these forms of restitution and sharing his wealth with the poor. In which case, Jesus is able to see beyond the stereotype which makes Zacchaeus the tax collector an outcast. He was not going to the house of a sinner but to that of a good man. Jesus always sees the real person and goes beyond the label. Can we always claim to do the same?

Whatever the interpretation, we can see that, though Zacchaeus may have belonged to a discredited profession, his heart was in the right place, in the place of compassion and justice.

And so Jesus tells Zacchaeus that “salvation”, wholeness and integrity has come to his house. In spite of his despised profession he is “a descendant of Abraham” because his behaviour is totally in harmony with the requirements of the Law and in fact goes well beyond it. For Jesus, too, no social status closes the door to salvation. For this is what it means to be a “son of Abraham”, namely, to be a loving, caring person full of compassion and a sense of justice and not just a keeper of ritualistic observances.

Zacchaeus, who had originally just wanted to have an external glimpse of Jesus, has now come to see Jesus in a much deeper sense. A seeing that changed his whole life as it did that of the beggar in yesterday’s story.

Further, in answer to the accusation that he has entered the house of a sinner, Jesus says, “The Son of Man has come to search out and save what was lost.” As he said on another occasion, the healthy have no need of a physician but only the sick. Jesus is the good Shepherd leaving the well-behaved 99 and going in search of the single one that has gone astray.

As we read this story, there are a number of things we could reflect on. We too want to see Jesus in the deepest possible sense. Only then can we truly become his disciples. We need to hear him saying to us, “I want to stay in your house today.” Let us open the door and welcome him in.

And we need to be careful in judging people from their appearance or their social position or their occupation. As a Church, we could spend a lot more time looking for those who are lost instead of concentrating on serving the already converted. In fact, only when people become active evangelisers themselves can we speak of them as “converted”, as “good Christians”.

Week 33 | Wednesday

FIRST READING (2 Maccabees 7:1,20-31)

Today’s reading is another story of fidelity under persecution. It is part of a famous story about the martyrdom of the Seven Maccabees, all brothers, together with their mother. They gave their lives one after the other rather than betray their Jewish faith by eating unclean food.

Having given the example of a venerable teacher of the Law [Eleazar, yesterday’s reading], the author now gives that of a mother and her sons. We know that the persecution, in which exceptionally savage methods were adopted, did indeed extend to women and children. The story, therefore, has a historical basis, behind the literary elements, such as the speeches ascribed to the characters (a common literary device).

As the reading opens we are told that seven brothers were arrested together with their mother. King Antiochus tried to force them to eat pork, forbidden by the Law, by torturing them by scourging with whips.

When one of the brothers, in the name of his siblings, stood up and told the king he was wasting his time and that they were prepared to die rather than violate the laws of their ancestors, the king became furious and prepared terrible instruments of torture for them. One by one, six of the brothers were subjected to most excruciating and inhuman torture in the sight of their mother. As each one died, they had words of defiance for the king. All of this is omitted from our reading.

We pick up the reading again with just the mother and youngest brother still alive. Through all the terrible experience of seeing her sons, one by one, subjected to torture and death, she maintained an extraordinary dignity “because of her hopes in the Lord”. In fact, she was proud of her sons for their loyalty to God and their Jewish beliefs and their readiness to sacrifice their lives.

In fact, speaking in their “ancestral tongue”, namely, Aramaic, so that the king and the torturers would not understand, she actually encouraged her sons. The author puts a speech on her lips to express her thoughts and feelings. She said she did not know when her children appeared in her womb, nor was it she who gave them the breath of life nor was she the cause of their physical development. But she is confident that the same God will give them back the breath and life because, for the sake of God’s laws, they have had no concern for themselves.

As she spoke thus to her son, Antiochus, who could not understand what she was saying, thought she was speaking insulting words about him. With this last son, the king tried a different approach. He promised to make the boy rich and happy if only he would abandon the traditions of his ancestors. He would even make him a “Friend” and entrust him with public office. ‘Friend’ was a title of honour, a survival from the court of Persia and there were various grades. ‘Friends of the King’ had free access to the sovereign who from time to time assigned them certain tasks

When the boy paid no attention to these tempting offers, the king turned to the mother to urge her to advise the young man to save his life. After the king had pressed her for a while in this manner, she finally agreed to persuade her son. She then quietly spoke to the boy in the language that only they could understand.

She begged her son to have compassion on her. She had looked after him lovingly from his earliest days in her womb and brought him up to the age he was now. She asked him to look at the world around him and consider how God had made everything out of nothing. This is, in fact, the first explicit allusion to creation ex nihilo in the Old Testament. Namely, that God made all things solely by his omnipotent will and his creative word. In Genesis, the world is not so much created as formed from a pre-existing Chaos, order is brought into what had been pure disorder.

The mother then urges her youngest son not to be afraid of his executioner but to prove himself as loyal as his brothers and accept death. Then “in the day of mercy”, she will receive all of them back again in the life that is to come.

The mother had hardly finished speaking, when the young man called out to Antiochus and the executioners: “What are you all waiting for?” He says he will not obey the king’s orders but only the ordinances that God gave to his ancestors through Moses. As for the king himself, he will not escape the hand of God for the terrible things he has done against the Hebrews.

Our reading stops at this point but the son’s speech continues in the same vein for several verses. The king was enraged at the young man’s words, which he had not expected to hear. The outcome was that this last brother was subjected to even more cruel tortures but remained loyal to his God to the end.

After all seven brothers had been martyred, the mother, too, was executed.

The cult of the ‘Seven Maccabaean Brothers’ spread into Europe, where it clearly made a great impact in a church which had its own share of Christians dying painful deaths for the sake of Christ and the Gospel. Several churches were dedicated in their honour, for instance, in Antioch, Rome, Lyons, and Vienna. Also, a composition known as the ‘Passion of the Holy Maccabees’ became widely distributed and served as model for several ‘Lives of Martyrs’.

It is, on the face of it, a tragic and cruel story. But it is clearly meant to be an inspiration to all Jews to put their faith in their God above all other considerations, including their own lives, in times of oppression. It is a message which many Jews have followed and one also followed by thousands of Christians down the centuries, people who chose to be faithful to the call of Christ even at the cost of their own lives. And there have been some outstanding examples in recent times.

Each one of us needs to ask to what extent we have ever compromised our faith in order to cling to something of lesser value. What price are we ready to pay to see that the values of the Gospel are upheld? “None of you can be my disciple unless he is ready to give up everything he has.” Am I ready for this?

GOSPEL (Luke 19:11-28)

Immediately following the story of the tax collector Zacchaeus comes a parable about the use of what God has given to us.

Jesus and his disciples are near Jerusalem “where they thought the reign of God was about to appear”. How right they were! It was indeed going to appear in Jerusalem but not at all in the way they expected - with the political and military defeats of enemies. As the beginning of the Acts reveals, they “were hoping” that Jesus was about to restore the political kingdom of Israel. In time, they would learn that a kingdom of far greater significance was coming into being and that they would play an important part in its inauguration.

The parable which follows differs significantly from a similar one of the talents in Matthew (25:14-30). In Luke, too, there may be two parables fused into one - that of the coins and that of a disputed claimant to a royal throne (symbolising Jesus himself).

Jesus begins the parable by saying that a man of noble birth went to a far country to have himself appointed king and then return. This may have reminded his hearers of Archelaus, the son of Herod the Great, who went to Rome in the year 4 BC to get himself appointed king. On his return, he succeeded his father. It may seem a rather unusual procedure but the Herods used to go to Rome in order to get appointed as rulers over the Jews.

Similarly, Jesus is soon to depart and in the future will return as king. During his absence, his servants are entrusted with their master’s affairs.

In the parable, the king, before leaving, gives ten units of money to each of ten servants and tells them to invest the money until his return. The coins are called ‘minas’ and were each worth about 100 drachmas, where a drachma was the equivalent of one day’s wages. Each coin then was the equivalent of about three months’ wages. This is a much smaller sum than those in Matthew’s parable. The other difference is that there are ten people and each one gets the same amount. (In Matthew’s parable there are three people who get respectively 10, 5 and 1 talents.)

In the parable, we are told that the people despised this man and did not want him as their king. In fact, a Jewish delegation had gone to Rome protesting at the idea of Archelaus becoming king. In the same way, Jesus was soon to go away and return some day as King and Judge. While he is ‘away’, his ‘servants’ will be entrusted to take care of their Master’s affairs. But others will reject him completely.

When he returned, the new king asked each of his servants to give an account of their trading, as Jesus will do at the Judgement. One had made another ten units on his capital of ten and he was rewarded by being put in charge of ten towns. Another had made five and was rewarded with five towns. But a third came along with just the capital he had been given. He had not traded the money for fear of losing it but kept it in a safe place. He was afraid of the king who, he said, took what he had not deposited, reaped what he had not sown.

The king was angry. He did not dispute his ruthlessness but he said that the man could at least have lent the money and got some interest. He ordered the ten units be taken from him and given to the one who had already made ten. This man was obviously good at business. The lesson of the parable is spelt out by Jesus: whoever has will be given more, but the one who has not will lose the little he has.

The last sentence of the parable, in a way, describes a third set of people in the story. The first set consists of those who used their coin well and profitably. The second is the one who kept his one coin and carefully guarded it. But finally, there are those who did not want this man as king and these are executed.”Now about those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king, bring them in and slay them in my presence.”

They are the greatest losers of all and it probably points to those Jews who rejected Jesus as King and had their city destroyed, referring to the destruction of Jerusalem in the year 70 AD. The punishment of those who rebelled and actively opposed the king was much more severe than that of the over-cautious servant.

The context of the whole parable is emphasised by the last sentence of today’s reading: “Having spoken thus Jesus went ahead with his ascent to Jerusalem.” We are coming near the end of our story and the climax to which it is headed.

The parable points to all those who are being called by Christ. It is the final part of one large unit (Luke 18:18-19:28) which includes the story of a rich man with good intentions but not able to respond to Jesus’ call, a prediction of Jesus’ passion not understood by the disciples, the story of a blind man who, after having his vision restored, becomes a follower of Christ, the story of another rich man who was willing generously to share his wealth with the poor and ending with the parable of the proper use of what we have.

The first rich man claimed to follow the commandments (the Law) but wanted to keep his money safely in his own possession. He is like the man who buried his money and did not invest it in the love and service of his brothers and sisters, especially those in need. The other, Zacchaeus, generously shared his wealth with the poor. He had invested his money well. He had learned to see. Any one who can really see where Jesus is has no alternative but to go his Way.

Finally, there are those who totally reject Christ and all that he stands for. Their blindness is total.

Today we are asked to reflect on the special gifts that God has given to each one of us and how we are using them for the benefit of brothers and sisters in need. What are our attitudes to money, to property, to professional status, academic or other qualifications or other gifts with which we are endowed? Where do we invest our gifts, our talents both inborn and acquired?

The message is clear: the more we invest, the more we will gain. We cannot stand still or just cling to what we have. The only way to gain is to let go, to give and to share. Good examples of this would be St Francis of Assisi or Mother Teresa. It is an attitude very foreign to many people’s way of thinking, who feel that life consists of amassing more and more, that security is in having.

But the Gospel way is really the only way that makes sense. It is not collecting but sharing that generates wealth, the wealth that really matters - freedom, security and peace.

Week 33 | Thursday

FIRST READING (1 Maccabees 2:15-29)

We go back to reading from the First Book of Maccabees and continue the story of the persecution of the Jews.

The New Jerusalem Bible comments:

Persecution produces a revival of religious awareness. Jewish opposition to Hellenism takes the form of physical violence, passive resistance, and ultimately a war of religion under the leadership of Mattathias, but particularly under Judas Maccabeus. Judas had realised that religious and political independence were interconnected: for this reason the struggle continued even after religious freedom had been won. But the shift from the religious to a political ground led to the compromises and party squabbles occupying the last part of the book. These in the end were to oust religious zeal and discredit the Maccabees’ successors, the Hasmonaeans, in the estimation of their devout contemporaries.

As the reading opens we are told that officials of King Antiochus had arrived in Modein, the town where Mattathias, son of a priest and originally from Jerusalem, had settled. The officials’ task was to enforce people to abandon their traditional religion and join in the sacrifices of the now official religion imposed by the king.

While many of the Israelites complied with the government order and joined in the sacrifices, Mattathias and his sons stood apart.

The officials approached Mattathias and tried to persuade him to change his mind. They used words of flattery and spoke of Mattathias as a great man in the town and a respected leader. Because of his position, they urged him to step forward and give an example which others would then surely follow. Then came the enticements. If Mattathias and sons would step forward for the sacrifice, they would be reckoned as “Friends of the King”, while he and his sons would be honoured with gold, silver and many gifts.

“Friend of the King” was a title of honour and a survival from the court of Persia. There were several grades. A “Friend” also had free access to the king, who would, from time to time, assign him various responsibilities. In yesterday’s reading we saw that the youngest of the seven Maccabee sons was also bribed with this honour.

Mattathias responded to the king by saying that if every nation in the king’s dominions were to conform to his commands, he, his brothers and his sons would remain faithful to the Law and its observances. So they would not obey the king’s command or deviate in any way from their religious beliefs.

Just as he finished speaking, a Jew came forward in the sight of all to offer sacrifice as the king’s edict had laid down. Seeing this, Mattathias was fired with religious zeal and “stirred to the depth of his being, gave vent to his legitimate anger”. He fell on the man and killed him right there at the altar. In the circumstances, the anger against such a flagrant violation of the Law is seen as justified. The killing is another matter.

But things did not stop there. Mattathias went on to cut down the royal commissioner responsible for enforcing the offering of sacrifice and also tore down the altar. In so doing, we are told that he imitated the example of Phinehas against Zimri, son of Salu.

The story of Phinehas is told in the Book of Numbers. Phinehas belonged to the priestly caste and was a grandson of Aaron, while Zimri was a prince of the ancestral house of the Simeonites. When Phinehas saw Zimri bring a Midianite woman (an unclean gentile from a hostile people) into the camp, presumably with sexual intentions, Phinehas immediately, fired with the same kind of anger, went and stabbed both Zimri and the woman in the alcove where they were ensconced. For this act of zeal for the Law he was commended by Yahweh (Num 25:6-15).

Mattathias then went through the town calling on all those who, like him, had zeal for the Law and based their lives on the covenant, to follow him and leave Modein. He then fled with his sons into the hills, leaving all his possessions behind. Many people who were “concerned for virtue and justice” did not actually take to the hills but went out into the desert and remained there.

The rebellion had begun.

We certainly admire Mattathias for his zeal, his courage and his total dedication to God’s Law as he understood it. We could hardly - in the light of the Gospel - admire his violence in killing two people.

There is also the danger in a situation like his of fanaticism taking over, as we see in religion-based movements in our own time: Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland, Jews and Palestinians in the Middle East, Catholics, Orthodox and Muslims in the former Yugoslavia, Hindus and Muslims in India. No wonder religion gets a bad name!

True religion requires fidelity unto death but it also rejects violence of any kind and respects other religious beliefs held in sincerity and good faith. We might profitably examine our own behaviour for any sign of bigotry, intolerance, prejudice, judgementalism - even against fellow-Catholics.

GOSPEL (Luke 19:41-44)

Jesus is now on the last stage of his mission. He approaches Jerusalem, which will be the scene for the last great act of his life - his passion, death and resurrection. From here too will rise up the new community founded in his name, commissioned to continue the work he had started.

As he approaches the city he weeps over its tragic end. He implies that, if the city had received him as Lord and King, it might not have met the fate that was in store for it.”If only you had known the path to peace this day; but you have completely lost it from view.” The second half of the word ‘Jeru-salem’ means ‘peace’, shalom. The city had not known the ‘path to peace’, which, of course, was that which led to Jesus, the Prince of Peace and the source of all peace in our lives. And it has hardly known peace since that time, especially where the Jewish people are concerned.

The rest of the passage is a prophecy of what in fact is going to happen to the city. We know that it was besieged by the Emperor Titus in the year 70 AD. However, Jesus’ words are built up from many Old Testament references and seem to refer rather to the destruction of Jerusalem in 587 BC as much, if not more, than that brought about by the Romans. And, as none of the distinctive features of the Roman siege are mentioned, the words seem to date from before that time.

But, of course, it was the Romans who destroyed the city and its huge Temple, one of the wonders of the ancient world, was reduced to ruins. The Temple was ransacked and its most precious ornaments, including the seven-branched candlestick, were carried off. All of this is sculpturally recorded in the triumphal Arch of Titus erected in Rome to commemorate his victory and which can be seen in the Forum to this day.

All this will take place, Jesus says, “because you did not recognise the time of your visitation”. So many failed to recognise in Jesus as Messiah God’s coming to visit them and rejected him.

With the destruction of the Temple, the Jewish faith was dealt a serious blow from which it may be said it has never fully recovered. No temple has ever taken its place for it is felt it can only be on the same sacred site in Jerusalem. Unfortunately for the Jews, a mosque stands on the site today and is not likely to be removed. All that is left of Herod’s temple is the Wailing Wall, where Jews go to lament their lost glory.

For us Christians, there is no exclusively holy place, although certain places are of special significance to us. But, as Paul reminds us, each baptised person is a temple of the Spirit and is to act as such and be respected as such.”Wherever two or three are gathered together in my name, there I am in the midst of them,” Jesus told his disciples (Matthew 18:20).

Such a gathering may be at a solemn papal Mass in the magnificent basilica of St Peter’s in Rome or it may be Christians gathering secretly in prayer in a labour camp in China. It does not matter. It is the closeness to Christ and to each other that matters and not the place.

Week 33 | Friday

FIRST READING (1 Maccabees 4:36-37,52-59)

Today’s reading recalls the institution of one of the most important feasts on the Jewish calendar, the Feast of Dedication.

Judas Maccabaeus and his brothers had been waging a guerrilla war against the Syrian occupation of their land. Eventually they defeated and drove out the Gentile forces. Having defeated their enemies, Judas Maccabeus, a son of Mattathias whom we saw in yesterday’s reading, called on his followers to go to Jerusalem to purify and dedicate the Temple which had been desecrated by having the “Abomination of Desolation”, that is, a statue of Baal or Zeus Olympus erected on it.

The New Jerusalem Bible notes:

The Temple was one of the principal objectives of the rebels, as the centre of Jewish religious life, without which the Law could not be observed in its fullness. The Gentiles had sacked and profaned it; now, as soon as the first victories are won, it is purified and re-consecrated. The death of Antiochus Epiphanes, which our author mistakenly places after the expeditions against the Idumaeans and Ammonites (in chap 5), doubtless had something to do with it too. The concept of the holiness of the Temple will be a dominant theme in Second Maccabees. (edited and text references omitted)

In passages immediately preceding the main part of our reading, we are told that Judas and his followers found the Temple in a state of total desolation - there was no one there, the altar desecrated, gates burnt down, vegetation growing freely as it might in the middle of a forest. Judas and his companions were devastated at the sight. He ordered the purification of the site by priests specially chosen for their impeccable credentials and faithfulness to the Law. It was then decided that the original altar should not be repaired but, because of its contamination by pagan rituals, should be pulled down and removed. A new altar was built in its place and other furnishings, like lamps, vessels, altar of incense and the table were installed.

Now we can pick up our reading.”On the 25th day of the 9th month, Chislev in the year 148”, that is, the 14th December 164 BC and the third anniversary of the first sacrifice offered to Zeus, a sacrifice was offered on the new altar. Thus was the new altar dedicated to the sound of all kinds of musical instruments. It was exactly the same day and the same time of the year when it had been originally desecrated by the Syrians. The people prostrated themselves and praised Heaven (this book sedulously avoids using God’s name) for all that had been achieved.

The dedication was celebrated for eight days altogether with holocausts, sacrifices of deliverance and thanksgiving sacrifices. Further adornments were added to the restored building. There was no end of rejoicing because the humiliation brought about by the gentiles had been obliterated.

Judas, with his brothers and the whole assembly, then laid it down that the days of dedication of the altar should be joyfully celebrated at the proper season for eight days every year, beginning on this 25th day of Chislev.

The feast of Dedication is still celebrated by Jews and known by its Hebrew name, Hanukkah. It is one of the ‘youngest’ feasts in the Jewish calendar. During the feast the Hallel (Psalms 113-118) was sung and leafy branches and palms were carried. Second Maccabees emphasises the similarities with the feast of Tabernacles or Shelters, which itself commemorated the inauguration of the Temple of Solomon.

The lamps lit at Dedication soon gave it its other name, ‘Feast of Lights’. The fact that these lamps, symbolising the Law, were placed not only in the Temple but in private houses assured the survival and popularity of the feast long after the desecration of the Temple in 70 AD. It is given great prominence in Second Maccabees. It is mentioned in John’s gospel, where we read: “It was winter, and the time came for the feast of the Dedication. Jesus was walking in the temple area, in Solomon’s Portico.” (John 10:22-23).

Today’s reading reminds us to remember the dedication of our own parish church and of the care and respect with which it should be maintained. Many communities have spared no expense and spent long years to build a church they felt worthy of being God’s house. We see the magnificent churches, say, of the Gothic or the Baroque period in Europe which took generations to be completed. And in some of these, too, we see magnificent liturgies of celebration on the great feasts of the year.

At the same time, we must never forget that the real Temple, the real dwelling place of God for us is his people.”You are the temple of the Spirit,” says Paul. We must remember always that the building, however magnificent, is for the people and not the other way round. When the building becomes poorly attended, an empty shell, just a work of art or a museum - or even a warehouse, it says something about the people by whom and for whom it was built.

GOSPEL (Luke 19:45-48)

Luke tells us very briefly of the scene where Jesus, now in Jerusalem, drives the traders from the courts of the Temple.”’My house is meant for a house of prayer’,” says Jesus quoting from Isaiah (56:7) and Jeremiah (7:11) respectively, “but you have turned it into ‘a den of thieves’.”

The trading took place in the outer court, also known as the Court of the Gentiles, and, as is not unusual in such situations, prices could be grossly inflated. John speaks of a cleansing at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry (2:13-25) but in the other three gospels it takes place at the end. Two possible explanations have been given. Either there were two cleansings or, more likely, John moved the story to the beginning of Jesus’ ministry for theological reasons. He wanted to show Jesus as Messiah right from the beginning whereas in the Synoptics Jesus’ identity as Messiah is only gradually revealed. There are also some differences in the various accounts. John mentions cattle and sheep and has Jesus use a whip made of cords. Matthew and Luke seem to indicate that the event took place on what we call Palm Sunday but for Mark it was on the following day (Mark 11:1-17).

Those coming to the Temple needed to buy animals for the sacrifices and they needed to change their Roman coins into acceptable Jewish currency (shekels) to make their contributions to the Temple. Jesus had no problem about that. What he objected to was that this business was being carried on inside God’s house when it could just as well have been done outside.

We all know how street traders try to get as close to the action as they can. However, there may be hints that priests in the Temple connived at this business and hence would certainly have profited from it. But Jesus (and probably others as well) felt that such business was not appropriate in a place dedicated to the worship of God.

It would be hard for us to imagine hawkers being allowed to set up stalls inside our churches, although the vendors of Sunday papers do get pretty close to the church doors.

Not surprisingly, the chief priests and the scribes - especially those who might have been involved in what must have been a lucrative business - were plotting how to get rid of Jesus who was upstaging their authority and accusing them of hypocrisy, greed and corruption. The chief priests, as members of the ruling Jewish council, the Sanhedrin, wielded great authority. But it was not going to be easy as the ordinary people continued to flock to Jesus and, as Luke tells us, “were hanging on his every word”.

Jesus is an example of the true prophet. He speaks as a messenger of God and is indeed God’s own Son. He stands as a counter-witness to all that is against truth, love and justice and as such inevitably incurs the anger and hostility of those who have power, power based on falsehood, on self-interest, corruption and injustice.

Our Church, in its communities and through individuals, is called on to continue that mission of counter-witness. It will win us the support and admiration of some but also the hostility, the anger and even the violence of others. This is something we should not at all be surprised at nor something we should try to avoid. Our only concern must be always to speak the truth in love.

God will take care of the rest. Because, ultimately, truth, love and justice will prevail.

Week 33 | Saturday

FIRST READING (1 Maccabees 6:1-13)

We read today of the end of the reign of King Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who caused such sufferings to the Jews, as we have seen. Disasters now overtake him, resulting in his sickness and death. For the author of First Maccabees the reason is clear: his desecration of God’s holy city of Jerusalem.

In terms of strict chronology, this episode of the king’s death should really be recorded before the Dedication of the Temple which we saw in yesterday’s reading.

The reading begins by telling us that Antiochus was making his way through the Upper Provinces of his empire, that is, inland to the east. Reports had reached him of a city called Elymais which was extremely wealthy with silver and gold. There was a temple there full of golden armour which had been left there by Alexander the Great, who was the son of Philip of Macedon, the first king of all the Greeks. This was the temple of Nanaea-Artemis.

In fact, there is no town of this name known. ‘Elymais’ is the Greek form of Elam, which refers to the country around Susa, the old capital of Persia, close to where the River Tigris runs in the Persian Gulf. The term more strictly refers to the mountainous region north of Susa.

Antiochus attacked the city but was unable to take it because, as we are told, the inhabitants had forewarning of the attack. In Second Maccabees we read: “When their leader [i. e. Antiochus] arrived in Persia with his seemingly irresistible army, they were cut to pieces in the temple of the goddess Nanea (a Persian counterpart of the Greeks’ Artemis), through a deceitful stratagem employed by Nanea’s priests” (2 Macc 1:13). First Maccabees does not mention this and may not know of it.

The author says that the king was routed in battle and had to retreat to Babylon which lay some distance to the north-west on the River Euphrates.

On top of this, more bad news reached the king. His armies which had invaded Judaea had been routed and that one of his top generals, Lysias, in particular, who had advanced with massive strength had been forced to flee before the Jews. The Jews, in turn, were now more powerful than ever thanks to the large amounts of weapons they had captured in their victories.

They had also pulled down the Abomination of Desolation, the altar to Zeus which Antiochus had erected in the Jerusalem Temple and rebuilt the old walls which surrounded the sanctuary and fortified Beth-Zur, one of the king’s cities.

All of this was too much for Antiochus who was shocked and profoundly shaken by the turn of events. These defeats - and perhaps the overthrow of the statue of all the all-powerful gods, Zeus and Baal, he believed in - filled him with grief, undermined his health. He took to his bed, fell sick with grief because things had turned out so badly for him. After spending some days confined to his bed, with recurrent attacks of melancholy and depression, he realised that his end was near. It was time for him to make his peace with his gods.

On his deathbed, he summons all his “Friends”, that is, his close associates and ministers, and makes a deathbed speech. He cannot sleep and he is overcome with anxiety about his fate. He wonders how he could have come to such a low state of distress, considering how generous and well-loved he was in his heyday. He remembers only the favours he showered on those who were close to him but seems to have been completely unaware of the depth of suffering that he had caused in the peoples he conquered and over-ran. How many other authoritarian tyrants have felt the same - that all they did was for the good of their people? Dictators like Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Saddam Hussein, who came to believe their own propaganda. It is a long list.

However, Antiochus does remember now how wrongly he acted in Jerusalem, when he plundered the Temple of all its sacred vessels and ordered the extermination of the people of Judah “for no reason at all”. He is now convinced that this is the reason why so many misfortunes have overtaken him and why he is dying miserable “in a foreign land”. It is the just punishment for all he did against God’s people. There is an element of true repentance in his words and for this he lays himself open to God’s mercy.

Technically speaking, he was not dying in a “foreign land” because Persia still was part of his Seleucid Empire. This book says the king’s death was punishment for the pillaging of the Temple in Jerusalem but Second Maccabees says it was for plundering the temple of Artemis. Second Maccabees also says, as we saw from the quotation above, that the king died in this temple, having walked into the trap set for him and his ‘Friends’ by the priests of the temple.

Actually, Antiochus must have died before all of this but the author has to adapt his story to fit the time frame he has chosen. As we saw in speaking of the Dedication yesterday, it is likely that it was because the king was already dead that Judas Maccabeus was able to seize the Temple in Jerusalem. As far as we are concerned, it is not an important point because it does not alter the basic meaning of the story and what it might say to us.

How do we think our lives will be evaluated by those who have known us in life? Do we believe ourselves to be more kindly and compassionate than we actually are? What actions of ours in the past do we now see were very wrong and unjust? What amends can we make for it is never too late to turn ourselves round. We cannot undo what has been done but we can act to make a radical change in our lives and relationships from today on.

GOSPEL (Luke 2:27-40)

Today we move on to the middle of chapter 20. In previous passages which are not included in these readings, Jesus had rebutted a challenge to his authority and left his critics literally speechless. This was followed by his speaking a parable about tenant farmers. He was clearly referring to his questioners and identifying them with the wicked tenants who abused all the emissaries (the prophets) sent by the owner of the vineyard and culminated in the killing of his son. The identity of the tenants and of the Son is clear. This is followed by Jesus being confronted with a seemingly innocuous question about paying taxes to Caesar which again resulted in the silence of his critics.

Today another group, the Sadducees, thought they might do better.

The Sadducees, among whom were numbered some of the most powerful Jewish leaders, including high priests, restricted their beliefs to the Pentateuch, the first five books of the Bible, reputedly written by Moses and containing the essence of the Jewish Law.

For that reason, unlike the Pharisees, they did not accept some beliefs which occur only in later books of the Old Testament. Among these, for instance, were the existence of angels and the resurrection of the dead.

The Sadducees thought then they could stump Jesus with an unanswerable conundrum. They first quote a prescription from the Law of Moses by which a man was expected to marry the wife of his eldest brother, if there had been no children by the marriage. They then propose an imagined situation of seven brothers. The first married but was childless, so in accordance with the requirements of the Law the second married the widow, then the third and so on. Eventually, all seven brothers married the woman but there were still no children.

The unanswerable question they proposed was that, if there really was a resurrection after death, which of the seven men would be the woman’s husband in the next life? For them, there was no problem; they did not believe in the resurrection. Death was the end of everything. For one who believed in the resurrection, it was an embarrassing difficulty - or so they thought.

Jesus quickly brushes the problem aside. To begin with, in the next life there are no marriage relationships.”The children of this age [i. e. those who belong this world] marry and remarry but those who are deemed worthy to attain to the coming age and to the resurrection of the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage”.

In the new life, all live face to face with God in a life that never ends. All are equally children of God, brothers and sisters to each other, taking their life and existence from him. That is now the focus of their relationship and it is through that relationship that they are bound together.

Jesus then goes on to challenge the Sadducees’ unbelief about life after death. He shrewdly quotes from a part of the Bible which they recognise as true. He reminds them of the scene where the voice from the burning bush identifies itself to Moses.”I AM the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob” (Exodus 3:6). God, says Jesus, is the God of the living and not of the dead [i. e. of those who no longer exist]. If Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are alive then the Sadducees’ argument falls. Perhaps we would not be convinced by such an argument but it clearly worked in this case.

Some scribes who were listening in were delighted at the refutation of the Sadducees. Most of them were Pharisees and believed in the resurrection. At the same time, after these replies of Jesus to both the Pharisees and the Sadducees, “they no longer dared to ask him anything”.

We, of course, believe in the resurrection not so much because of Jesus’ arguments here but because of his own resurrection and his promise to share his life with us forever.

Week 34 | Monday

FIRST READING (Daniel 1:1-6,8-20)

For this, the last week of the Church Year, we will be reading the Book of Daniel. At first sight it seems to be a historical book but in fact it is placed among the prophetic books of the Old Testament. It consists of two principal parts: one of apparently historical accounts and the other with a number of visions.

It was written during the period of persecution we were reading about last week in the Books of Maccabees with the intention of bolstering the morale of the Jews by reading about the heroic exploits of Daniel and his friends in a similar period of persecution about five hundred years earlier.

The book belongs to the prophetic genre because it is essentially conveying a message of hope and confidence in the ultimate victory of God and his followers.

But it is also an apocalyptic book because its message is revealed in highly symbolical language, much of which would only make sense to initiates and not to outsiders. In this it very much resembles the Book of Revelation in the New Testament.

As we will see from the passages chosen for this week it is a highly readable and even entertaining book but this should not distract us from its serious underlying message. Especially because of the vision of the final coming of the Son of Man (to be read on Friday), this Book has been chosen for the final week of the year (as the Book of Revelation will be read in the same week of Year II).

Today’s reading is from the introduction to the book and presents four young Hebrews who are brought to serve in the court of King Nebuchadnezzar in Babylon.

The story begins by recalling the time when King Nebuchadnezzar besieged Jerusalem during the third year of the reign of King Jehoiakim of Judah, the Southern Hebrew Kingdom, in which Jerusalem was situated. This would have been in 605 BC. We can read about this in the Second Book of the Kings. Nebuchadnezzar took Jehoiakim and the sacred vessels of the Temple back to Babylon (here called Shinar). He put his trophies into the treasure of his own gods. Those reading the story and living under the tyranny of Antiochus IV Epiphanes would immediately have seen the parallel with the plunder of Jerusalem and the desecration of the temple which they themselves experienced under the Assyrians.

Daniel and his companions were in this first deportation to Babylon. The prophet Ezekiel was taken away in a second deportation in 597 BC. In a third deportation in 586 BC, Jerusalem and the Temple were destroyed.

From the Israelites in this first deportation, the king ordered Ashpenaz, his chief eunuch, to pick out a number of young men who were of noble descent. They had to be both physically perfect and intellectually outstanding and so suitable for service at the royal court. They were not then being chosen merely as pages. In eastern courts those destined for the career of ‘letters’ (scribes, translators, archivists, scholars, astrologers, etc.) were trained from childhood. The emphasis on physical appearance may indicate that other personal services for the king were also expected of them. This would be quite normal.

They would also be taught to speak and write the Chaldaean language. This would include learning the classical literature in Sumerian and Akkadian cuneiform, a complicated syllabic writing system. The language of normal communication in multiracial Babylon, however, was Aramaic, written in an easily learned alphabetic script and certainly known to the four young men.

They were to be given only the best of food, straight from the king’s own table. This, he felt, would help maintain their good looks. Three years of training were set aside before they entered royal service.

We are now for the first time told their names. They are all from the kingdom of Judah (the Southern Kingdom). They were Daniel (means “God is my judge”), Hananiah (“the Lord shows grace”), Mishael (“Who is what God is?”), and Azariah (“the Lord helps”). Our reading omits their also being given Babylonian names by the chief eunuch: Daniel - Belteshazzar; Hananiah - Shadrach, Mishael - Meshach, and Azariah - Abed-nego. These names will be used later in the book. It is clear that Daniel stands taller than his three companions and there are some clear resemblances between Daniel and Joseph, the son of Jacob who became a high official in the Pharaoh’s court.

There was one problem for the young men in this idyllic life: they were expected to eat food which was in violation of Jewish dietary laws. Daniel, who was anxious to observe the Law, asked the chief eunuch to be excused from eating food which his religion regarded as unclean. This was not only because the food was, by Jewish laws, “unclean” but, before eating, the Babylonians offered food and drinks to their gods. So, even otherwise clean foods could be unclean because they had been offered to idols or had been cooked on wood taken from a sacred grove. Some of the wine could have been poured over a pagan altar.

Unclean animals, like pigs, could have been used as meat and even other animals might not have been killed and prepared in ways acceptable to Jewish law. For a devout Jew, to disobey the laws about food was equivalent to apostasy and we saw in the readings from Maccabees how Antiochus was forcing the Jews to eat pork as a sign of apostasy.

The eunuch who, by God’s favour, looked kindly on Daniel’s request was at the same time anxious about the king’s reaction. The young men were being fed special food from the royal table and, if by not eating this food, the Jewish boys began to look thinner than the other young men, the king would not be pleased and the eunuch’s own head could be in danger for allowing this.

Daniel then asked the guardian appointed to look after them by the eunuch to allow them a 10 days’ trial just eating raw vegetables and water and, at the end of that time, see how they compared with the other boys. Raw vegetables and fresh water would be safe from any ritual uncleanness. The request was granted. The number 10 often had the symbolic significance of completeness.

At the end of the 10 days, the four Jewish boys looked fatter and healthier than those who had been eating from the king’s table and were allowed to continue with this diet. [From our better knowledge of food properties, we know it is possible that their vegetarian diet was actually much healthier than the rich diet that came from the king’s table. ]

In addition to their physical perfection, God gave the four young men knowledge and skill in every aspect of literature and learning. This would mean that they mastered Babylonian literature on astrology and divination by dreams. In addition, Daniel had a special gift of interpreting every kind of vision and dream (in this he resembles Joseph). But in the crucial tests of interpretation and prediction, which Daniel was called on to give later on, only God’s special revelation enabled Daniel to interpret correctly.

When the time of their formation was complete, the chief eunuch presented all the young men to King Nebuchadnezzar. He spoke with all of them but was most impressed by the four young Jews. And so they became members of the royal court. Whenever the king consulted them, he found them ten times (perfection again) more reliable than all the magicians and soothsayers in his kingdom.

There are lessons flowing from this story, which does not have to be taken as literally true, although much of the background has a historical basis. It is an edifying story to encourage people living in difficult conditions in a much later age. The loyalty of Daniel and his companions to the requirements of their faith under difficult circumstances is presented as a model and an inspiration to their descendants. And, with God on their side, they were bound to succeed. The gods of Babylon were no match for the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Moses.

We, too, can be inspired by the integrity and courage of these young men. But, in our own Christian tradition, there many other stories - strictly historical - of people who have not hesitated to give their lives not just to keep external religious observances but for much greater issues of Truth and Justice and the Kingdom of God.

GOSPEL (Luke 21:1-4)

Today we begin the last chapter of Luke’s gospel preceding his account of the Passion. Jesus is still in Jerusalem and spending time preaching in the Temple.

As he stood one day near the treasury where there were 13 trumpet-shaped boxes to receive the offerings, he saw among all the well-off people dropping in their (surplus) money a poor widow who put in two copper coins of very small value.

Jesus immediately comments on her generosity and faith. The others were putting in offerings which they could easily afford; it would have involved no diminution of their lifestyle, no hardship of any kind. But this woman was a poor widow and therefore belonging to the least advantaged of all people in that society. In fact, poverty and widowhood were, for many, almost synonymous.

And this woman put in everything she had. It has been observed that she had two coins and she put in both. In the circumstances, she need only have put in one and kept the other for her own needs.

Jesus sets her up as an example of someone who put her total trust in God’s providence. She gave everything to him.

No one is saying that one should literally follow her example - it could be seen as irresponsible. We are told to love our neighbours - but also ourselves. At the same time, how often when we do dip into our pockets do we really give to others money that we were thinking of spending on something we do not really need? Or are we like the people in today’s story who casually give money they will not miss in the slightest? There is a difference between ‘giving alms’ and sharing our goods and good fortune with those who have less, a lot less, than us.

St Paul, writing to the Christians of Corinth and appealing for help for poorer Christian communities, says in part:

For if the eagerness is there, the gift is acceptable according to what one has - not according to what one does not have. I do not mean that there should be relief for others and pressure on you, but it is a question of a fair balance between your present abundance and their need, so that their abundance may be for your need, in order that there may be a fair balance. As it is written:

Whoever had much did not have more,

And whoever had little did not have less. (Exodus 16:18).

This is a nice description of what justice in our society means.

There have been Christians who closely followed the widow’s example. Mother Teresa absolutely refused to have any stable income for her work and she was not been alone in this. And it has often been remarked that it is people at the lower end of our society who are most generous in supporting needy causes.

The fact that this story comes just before the Passion has led many to see in this woman a symbol of Jesus himself, who will, in the words of the Letter to the Philippians, “empty himself” completely and surrender his whole life totally into the hands of his Father, holding nothing back. But even during Jesus’ life he seems to have had no private means of any kind. At the same time, he was not a beggar. He simply lived a life where he gave totally of himself and others gave him in return just what he needed at any particular time.

Clearly, most people cannot literally follow the example of Jesus but there are many examples of people who did. If only we, too, could have that kind of trust, that kind of generosity, that ability to share and that kind of freedom - freedom from material ‘wants’ and freedom for others.

The richest person is not the one who has accumulated much but the one who has the least needs. In this sense, this poor widow was rich indeed.

Week 34 | Tuesday

FIRST READING (Daniel 2:31-45)

Daniel, we saw, had been blessed with a divine gift for interpreting dreams.

King Nebuchadnezzzar has had a series of dreams but he cannot remember their contents which greatly disturbed him. He calls in all his wise men and astrologers to interpret them. Naturally, without being told the contents, they cannot do so although they apparently go into all kinds of rambling disquisitions to cover their ignorance. The king goes into a rage and wants them all executed. Daniel and his companions are also to be given the same fate.

Daniel then approaches the king’s chief executioner to ask the king to hold off the executions (in which he would also be involved) because he wants the opportunity to interpret the king’s dreams. He is then brought into the presence of Nebuchadnezzar, who asks if Daniel can interpret his dreams. The young man says that all the wise men and soothsayers in the kingdom did not know how to interpret the dreams but “there is a God in heaven who reveals mysteries”. He is the one who, through Daniel, will tell the king what is going to happen in the final days.

Daniel then begins his interpretation. He knows that the king is concerned about the future. It has been revealed to Daniel not because he is wiser than anyone else but so that the king can learn the meaning of his dream and to understand his innermost thoughts.

It is at this point that our reading begins, with a description of the contents of the dream and the meaning of its symbols. This, says Daniel, is what the king saw:

A huge bright statue, terrible to look at. The head of the statue was of fine gold, its chest and arms were of silver, the belly and thigh of bronze, the legs - part iron and part clay.

As the king watched in his dream, a stone broke away, untouched by any human hand. This stone struck the feet of iron and clay and shattered them.

Then all the rest of the statue collapsed and broke into fine pieces “as fine as chaff on the threshing floor in summer”. A wind blew them all away, leaving not a trace.

On the other hand, the stone which had struck the statue grew into a great mountain, filling the whole world.

Now, says Daniel, comes the interpretation of the dream.

First, Nebuchadnezzar himself. God has given him sovereignty, power, strength and honour. Daniel pointedly notes that the source of the king’s power is God and not the divine nature which Nebuchadnezzar claims for himself. In addition all human life and all other life have been entrusted to his rule. He is the head of gold in the dream.

After him will come another kingdom, of silver, which will not be as great as Nebuchadnezzar’s, followed by a third of bronze, which will rule the whole world.

Then there will be a fourth, “hard as iron, iron that crushes and pulverises all”. And, like iron, it will crush and break all earlier kingdoms.

The feet - part iron and part clay - represent a kingdom that will split in two, but will maintain some of the strength of iron: in other words, the kingdom will be partly hard and partly brittle. And, just as the feet are a combination of earth and clay, so the two will be mixed together in human seed. But they will not hold together, any more than iron and clay can.

Then it is that God will set up a kingdom never to be destroyed, a kingdom which will not pass into the hands of another race. On the contrary, it will shatter and absorb all the previous kingdoms and last forever. This is symbolised by the stone, untouched by human hand, which broke away and reduced all the metals to powder.

Daniel concludes: “The Great God has shown the king what is to take place. The dream is true; the interpretation exact.”

For us, at this distance in time, the interpretation itself needs some further elucidation. The references are to actual historical dynasties which succeeded one another.

The gold head represents the Neo-Babylonian empire; the silver chest and arms, the Median empire; the bronze belly and thighs, the Persian empire; the iron legs, the Greek empire established by Alexander the Great, c. 330. The iron will be the strongest, the kingdom of Philip of Macedon and his famous son, Alexander, and will overcome all others. With his death, Alexander’s kingdom divides but cannot reunite because the iron and clay of the feet will not blend. After Alexander’s death, his empire was divided among his generals. The two resulting kingdoms, which most affected the Jews, were the dynasty of the Ptolemies in Egypt and that of the Seleucids in Syria, who tried in vain by war and through intermarriage (“mixed together in human seed”), to restore the unity of Alexander’s empire.

The diminishing value of the metals from gold to silver to bronze to iron represents the decreasing power and grandeur of the rulers of the successive empires, from the absolute despotism of Nebuchadnezzar to the relatively democratic system of the Greeks. The metals also symbolise a growing degree of toughness and endurance, with each successive empire lasting longer than the preceding one.

Last of all comes the messianic kingdom. The stone hewn from the mountain is the messianic kingdom awaited by the Jews. This is an apocalyptic prediction which, in Daniel, does not yet know about the way in which it will be realised. He sees it still as something exclusively Jewish (“It will not pass into the hands of another race”).

But with the coming of Jesus, the form of the prediction becomes clear. He is the stone which breaks away from the mountain. He is the Messiah come to establish the everlasting Kingdom of God, very different from the preceding empires which have now all been reduced to dust and blown away like chaff. The empires of the earth collapse and give place to a new kingdom which, being founded by God, is everlasting, the Kingdom of God. Jesus will later refer to himself as the corner-stone formerly rejected and as the foundation stone, with a clear allusion to the stone which breaks away from the mountain and crushes him on whom it falls.

Our reading ends with Daniel’s interpretation but we may as well add in the conclusion of this narrative. In spite of the disturbing nature of the interpretation as far as Nebuchadnezzar is concerned, he is deeply moved and uncharacteristically falls prostrate before Daniel as to a god. He acknowledges the greatness of Daniel’s God.”Your god is indeed the God of gods, the Master of kings, and the Revealer of mysteries.” It will not be the last time the king acknowledges the God of Israel.

Daniel is then rewarded by being made governor of the whole province of Babylon and chief sage of the kingdom and given many gifts. However, Daniel entrusts the running of the province to his three companions while he remains in attendance on the king.

This vision and its interpretation, of course, is not just a historical narrative. It is a special message of hope for a people who are under the cruel persecution of the tyrannical King Antiochus, about whom we were reading last week in the books of the Maccabees.

And history confirms that no dynasty, no political power lasts for ever. In our own century we have seen the collapse of powerful (and very anti-Christian) empires - German Nazism and Italian Fascism and Russian Communism. The millions of peoples who suffered under these regimes must have felt at times very much like the Jews under Antiochus. Yet, all these regimes have collapsed and much more rapidly than most had hoped for or expected.

For us Christians, our hope is based on God because God represents truth and justice and these must always will prevail in the end. As Daniel said to Nebuchadnezzar: “This is exactly what you dreamed, and its meaning is sure.” Our lives are based not on any earthly regime but on the rock that is our Christian faith. The Kingdom of God is the stone which grew into a great mountain, filling the whole world.

GOSPEL (Luke 21:5-11)

The Temple at Jerusalem in Jesus’ time was a magnificent building and one of the wonders of the world. As the Gospel tells us it had been more than 40 years in the building and was not yet completed.

People were commenting to Jesus on the beautiful decorations of jewels and votive offerings. His hearers must have been shocked, if not utterly sceptical, when Jesus told them that in time the building would be utterly destroyed with “not one stone left on another”. Who would ever have dreamt that the World Trade Center, that temple to capitalism, would be reduced to rubble in a matter of minutes? And how much more the Temple of God?

“When will this happen?” they asked him.”And what will be the signs preceding?” Jesus’ answer is directed more to the end of time than to the actual destruction of the Temple which occurred about 40 years later in the year 70 AD. In fact, one event blends into the other. To many who were witnesses to its destruction, it must have seemed like the end of their world. What kind of life could they live without their Temple, without the dwelling place of their God? How could Yahweh allow such a thing to happen? It left a huge empty space in their lives which nothing else could fill.

Jesus’ warning is that his followers should not misread the signs or be too alarmed. It seems the early Christians were in general expecting Jesus to return for his Second Coming within their lifetime. This must have led to many false alarms - people claiming to be the returned Lord or warning that the end of all things was close at hand. Even the destruction of the Temple (for many of the Christians were converted Jews) must have looked like the beginning of the end. St Augustine had similar feelings as Rome, the heart of Christendom, fell in ruins to the ‘barbarians’ (the ancestors of many of us!). The end of Rome seemed to him like the end of the world.

Jesus tells his followers not to be too ready to believe what they hear people saying. Nor are they to be too alarmed when they hear of wars and social upheavals. There will be, too, many natural disasters, widespread diseases and celestial phenomena. These do not necessarily spell the end. The message now being given is: “The end does not follow immediately.”

At every pivotal time in the history of our planet, there are people who claim to see the end in sight. The coming of the third millennium was no exception. So far they have all been wrong. The attitude of Christians is not to be one of fear and anxiety. It sees the new era as a time of challenge and opportunity, a time for new beginnings.

On a more personal and much more realistic level, we may be anxious about the signs of our own time of departure from this world. But again it does not help to become fearful and anxious but rather to live each day to the full and to make it productive for ourselves and others.

Week 34 | Wednesday

FIRST READING (Daniel 5:1-6,13-14,16-17,23-28)

If yesterday’s reading was about ‘feet of clay’, today’s is about ‘the writing on the wall’.

(Our Bible is full of phrases that have passed into our daily language and familiar even to those who have never opened the book.)

The setting for today’s reading is a great banquet thrown by King Belshazzar for his nobles, a thousand of them altogether. In the Babylonian language the king’s name would be Bel-shar-usur, meaning ‘May-Bel-protect-the-king’. Although further on in the account he is called the son of Nebuchadnezzar, he is in fact known to be the son Nabonidus, who gave him the title of king. ‘Son’ could mean ‘descendant’ or even ‘successor’. Actually, we know that several kings of Babylon intervened between Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar but it was necessary for the author to put the two kings close together so as to make Daniel’s appearance plausible as being alive during both reigns.

In the presence of his guests the king began drinking his wine and there is a hint that he was drinking quite a lot, with the not uncommon outcome of making strange on-the-spot decisions. He suddenly gives the order for gold and silver vessels which had been looted by King Nebuchadnezzar from the Temple in Jerusalem to be brought in so that his wives, his nobles and the women who sang for him could drink from them. Which they did. The orgy of revelry and blasphemy on such occasions is well documented by ancient Greek historians such as Herodotus and Xenophon.

As they drank from these sacred vessels, they were also singing the praises of their idols of gold and silver, of bronze and iron, of wood and stone. Using vessels consecrated to the worship of Yahweh for the adulation of ‘gods’ made of inanimate materials was, to any Jew, a horrific profanation.

It was not surprising, then, that all of a sudden, a hand was seen writing on one of the palace walls, clearly visible by the light of a nearby lamp. So the king could see the hand clearly. (We need to remember that, in pre-electricity days, the banquet hall would be in relative darkness, especially the walls.) The highly superstitious king was filled with fear and alarm. He became weak and began to tremble all over.

He immediately promised huge rewards to any sage who could interpret what was going on. None of them could do so. The king became even paler. Then the queen entered and told the king not to fear. There was a man who had been chief sage in the days of King Nebuchadnezzar, “your father”, who was an expert in the interpretation of dreams. Daniel is brought in to the king’s presence.

The king tells Daniel what he has heard about him, that he is one of the Judean exiles brought to Babylon by his “father” (Nebuchadnezzar) and that he is known for his “perception, intelligence and marvellous wisdom”. He hopes that Daniel will be able to do what all his other wise men cannot do - decipher the strange message written on the wall. In return, Daniel will be dressed in purple (the colour worn by the rich and powerful), have a gold chain put around his neck (probably the equivalent of an English knighthood) and be made one of the top three administrators of his kingdom. (These last two paragraphs are not in our reading.)

In a great show of integrity and courage, Daniel spurns the offer of gifts and rewards, while assuring the king that he is able to interpret the strange message. He first tells the king that his father, Nebuchadnezzar, had abused his great power and, in his pride, was driven from his throne. Only in his misery did he acknowledge God as the true ruler of people everywhere. (These remarks are not included in our reading.)

Now, says Daniel, Belshazzar has learnt nothing and is walking the same path. He then goes on to make a scathing attack on Belshazzar and his behaviour. He has defied the Lord of heaven by taking the sacred vessels which were pillaged by Nebuchadnezzar from the Temple in Jerusalem and he, his nobles, his wives and his women entertainers have drunk their wine from them. In addition, the king has worshipped gods made of gold and silver, bronze and iron, of wood and stone, which can neither see, hear nor understand. At the same time, he has paid no honour to the God to whom he owes his very life and all his prosperity.

There are, then, three main accusations brought against Belshazzar: he sinned not through ignorance but through disobedience and pride, because he should have learnt from the fate of his “father” who was deposed and exiled to live among farm animals; he defied God by desecrating the sacred vessels; and he worshipped man-made idols instead of the God from whom all he has and is came.

And now, says Daniel, that is why the hand has written these three words: mene, teqel, and parsin. The meaning of the words, continues Daniel, is as follows:

Mene: God has measured your sovereignty and put an end to it;

Teqel: you have been weighed in the balance and found wanting (in the light of God’s expectations);

Parsin: your kingdom has been divided and given to the Medes and Persians.

The three mysterious words may represent three oriental measures of weight or of coins - a mina, a shekel (60th part of a mina) and a half-mina (or paras). There is then a play on words which emerges in Daniel’s interpretation above.

Mene suggests the verb mana, “to measure”; teqel the verb shaqal, to “weigh out”; while parsin suggests both the verb paras, “to divide”, and the Persians. (Descendants of Persians in India are still known as Parsi.)

The full meaning, however, of Daniel’s interpretation is not so clear to us. It could allude to the decreasing influence of the three successive empires - Babylonians, Medes and Persians, Persians. Or it may refer to the three kings, Nebuchadnezzar, Evil-merodach and Belshazzar. Or else of Nebuchadnezzar, Belshazzar, and the kings of the ‘Medes and Persians’. Whichever reading is right, the outcome is the same - the ultimate and inevitable collapse of powerful dynasties and empires.

The epilogue to the story is not given in our reading but the king, in spite of the denunciation he has heard from Daniel’s lips, keeps his promise and clothes Daniel in purple and gold and gives him the third place in his kingdom. And that very night, too, the king is murdered.

The message of the story is clearly directed against King Antiochus under whom the Jews were suffering and who had also desecrated and plundered their Temple. The author is saying that Antiochus’ fate will not be any different from that of Nebuchadnazzar or of Belshazzar. And there lies a message of hope for every suffering people.

No ruler, however powerful, can long maintain a regime that goes against the values of God. Nor can any one of us find true happiness in a lifestyle that violates the same values.

GOSPEL (Luke 21:12-19)

Jesus continues his warnings, but now mainly to his own disciples. He foretells experiences and happenings which will be soon realised in the Acts of the Apostles, not to mention in the subsequent history of the Church through the centuries, not excluding our own.

Jesus speaks of abuse and persecution.”They will hand you over to the synagogues and prisons.” The term ‘hand over’ is a theme word occurring again and again in the New Testament. John the Baptist was handed over to Herod who put him in prison and then executed him. Jesus himself is handed over first to the leaders of his own people and then into the hands of the Romans who would execute him. And now Jesus tells his disciples that they, too, can expect to be ‘handed over’ and to be dragged before civil and religious courts and “all because of my name”.

Many of the early Christians came in conflict with Jewish communities and were ‘handed over’ to synagogues. Synagogues were not only prayer halls and places to learn the Scriptures but also for civil administration and as places of confinement while awaiting trial.

The charges may be civil or criminal but the real reason will be that the accused are followers of Christ. (China, for example, always insists that the arrest of religious people is because of their violation of civil and criminal laws and not because of their religious affiliation.) As such Christians become objects of fear and hatred, their ideas seen as threatening and even subversive.

But, says Jesus, they are not themselves to fear or be anxious. When the time comes, they will know what to do and what to say. He will tell them what to say and how to answer. A promise that has been vindicated again and again. The really sad thing is that those betraying them to the authorities will often be members of their own household - “parents, brothers, relatives and ‘friends’”. Again, this prophecy sadly has been realised all too often.

“All will hate you because of me.” This is strange and, in a way, makes no sense. Jesus who preached truth, love, freedom, peace, justice and non-violence becomes, in his followers, the object of lies, hatred, imprisonment and torture, division, injustice and the most terrible violence.

“Yet not a hair of your head will be harmed.” Not a phrase to be taken literally because many suffer terribly in their bodies but there is an inner integrity and wholeness that nothing can destroy.

“By patient endurance you will save your lives.” That is, by going through all that our enemies can throw at us we come out at the end people who are whole and complete and who can lift our heads up high. One thinks of, in our own time, Bishop Oscar Romero, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Maximilian Kolbe and many others. Their memories are treasured and become an inspiration to all of us.

Let us pray that we may have the courage to be true to our Christian values whatever the cost. Let us not be surprised that our faith and our religion can create such anger and such hostility. At the same time, we reach out continually in truth and love to dissipate the unjustified fears that our beliefs can engender in others.

We are a threat to false values but we must try hard to help people see where real truth and goodness lie. And we do that by seeking for that in our own lives.

Week 34 | Thursday

FIRST READING (Daniel 6:12-28)

We now find Daniel living under a third king, Darius. He is ‘Darius the Mede’ presented as the successor to Belshazzar, whom we saw murdered at the end of yesterday’s reading. He is actually unknown to history nor is there any room for him between the last Chaldaean (Babylonian) king and Cyrus the Persian, who had already conquered the Medes before capturing Babylon. The character of this Darius has probably been modelled on that of the Persian King Darius the Great (522-486 BC), the second successor of Cyrus.

Again, Daniel is the central figure. He represents not a historical person but the Jew who is absolutely loyal to his God and his faith under all circumstances. An uplifting message to the readers of the book now living under the harsh rule of Antiochus.

Daniel had risen to the very top of the kingdom’s hierarchy. He was the first among three “presidents” to whom over 120 princes or satraps, who ruled the kingdom, were responsible. He was so superior in every way to the other presidents and satraps that the king seriously thought of making him ruler of the whole kingdom. Not surprisingly, this occasioned jealousy among his fellow presidents and the satraps. They wanted to find some affair of state by which they could discredit Daniel but they could find absolutely nothing with which to fault him.

They then realised that the only way to get him was to focus on Daniel’s Jewish faith.”We shall never find a way of discrediting Daniel, unless we try to do something with the law of his God.” They went in a body to the king and, after the usual sycophantic expressions of flattery, asked him to issue an edict. The edict was to say: “Whoever within the next 30 days prays to anyone, divine or human, other than to yourself, Your Majesty, is to be thrown into the lions’ den.” They then asked the king to sign the document at once so that it could not be changed and would come into effect immediately. The king, no doubt flattered by the language of the edict, signed it.

When Daniel heard about the edict, he retired to his house, where the windows of his upstairs room faced Jerusalem. Three times each day, according to his usual custom, he went down on his knees to pray and give praise to God. The custom of praying with the face towards Jerusalem seems to date at least from the Exile. Later, Christians had their churches facing east, towards the rising sun, a symbol for the Risen Jesus, while Muslims pray facing Mecca.

All of this is by way of introduction to today’s reading which picks up the story at this point.

The men who had got the king to sign the edict went to Daniel’s house and - probably as they expected - found Daniel praying to his God. They then went to the king and reminded him of the edict he had signed and the penalties for its non-observance.”The decision stands,” replied the king, “because the laws of the Medes and Persians are irrevocable.” The men then reported that they had found Daniel praying to his own God three times a day - a clear violation of the edict.

The king, who was clearly fond of Daniel and valued his services to the kingdom, was distressed at this information and wanted to do something to save Daniel. But the enemies of Daniel kept reminding the king that laws he passed could not be changed for anyone.

The king then reluctantly ordered that Daniel be thrown into the pit of lions. His parting words were: “Your own God, whom you have served so faithfully, will have to save you.” The pit was then closed with a large stone and sealed with the king’s own signet ring and those of his nobles. Daniel’s fate, it seemed, was literally sealed. (Is this the origin of the term?)

The king, however, remained deeply disturbed at his decision. He spent the night in fasting and refused to receive any of his concubines. He spent a sleepless night worrying over Daniel and, at the first light of dawn, rushed to the pit. As he reached it he called out: “Has your God, whom you serve so faithfully, been able to save you from the lions?”

To his amazement, the king hears Daniel speak back to him from the pit: “May your majesty live for ever! My God sent his angel who sealed the lions’ jaws and they did me no harm, since in his sight I am blameless. Neither have I done you any wrong, your majesty.”

The king was overjoyed and ordered that Daniel be immediately released from the pit. He was unhurt because he had trusted in his God. The king then ordered that Daniel’s accusers be thrown into the pit together with their wives and children, in accordance with Persian custom. We remember in Jesus’ parable about the unforgiving servant, the king ordered the first servant “to be sold along with his wife and children, and all his property to pay the debt” (Matt 18:25). The new prisoners had hardly reached the floor of the pit than they were immediately devoured by the hungry lions.

The king then sent a proclamation not just to his own kingdom but to “all nations, peoples and languages dwelling throughout the world”. In effect, he ordered a national conversion. The God of Daniel was to be reverenced and feared. It was an order in the form of a triumphal hymn for all to “tremble with fear” before the God of Daniel:

He is the living God, he endures for ever,
his kingdom will never be destroyed
and his empire will never come to an end.

(Unlike that of Darius and every other temporal ruler.)

He saves, sets free, and works signs and wonders
in the heavens and on earth;
he has saved Daniel from the power of the lions.

Once again, the story is to be read in the context of the Jews suffering under the persecution of the tyrant Antiochus. If God will deliver Daniel from those who hate his religion and from the ferocity of the lions, he will do the same for his faithful people now.

God’s kingdom will not be destroyed; God’s dominion is without end - unlike that of secular rulers.

As the story of Daniel clearly illustrates, God is a deliverer and a saviour for all those who put their trust in him. His Kingdom is one that will never end.

GOSPEL (Luke 21:20-28)

Jesus continues his warnings of what is to come.

It is a blending of what is going to happen to Jerusalem and of the end of all things. The images are mainly biblical and apocalyptic, from Old Testament prophecies and not to be taken as an accurate description of what is actually going to happen some 40 years later. The sign that the end was near would be Jerusalem surrounded by armies accompanied by the “abomination that causes desolation” (cf. Matt 24:15). Nevertheless, it is true that Jerusalem was encircled by the armies of Rome. The safest place to be was not in the city, which was reduced to rubble, but in the surrounding hills.

Jesus is emphasising not so much the actual events but rather their cause - the faithlessness and corruption of so many for which destruction was the inescapable outcome. So he calls them the “days of retribution” or the “time of punishment”, not indicating God’s revenge but the natural result of evil and corruption, warnings of which the Scripture, especially the prophets, are full. See, for example, Isaiah 63:4; Jeremiah 5:29 and Hoseah 9:7. And especially Daniel 9:27: “For one week he [King Antiochus] will make a firm compact with the many [faithless Jews]. Half the week [three and a half years] he shall abolish sacrifice and oblation. On the temple wing shall be the horrible abomination until the ruin that is decreed is poured out upon the horror.” The temple was desecrated by Antiochus from 167 to 165 BC. The “horrible abomination” perhaps refers to an inscription placed on the portal of the temple dedicating it to the Olympian Zeus. All of this, of course, was to be repeated. And, in many ways, has been repeated again and again. One thinks of the nude statue set up as a deity in the Cathedral of Notre Dame in Paris during the French Revolution.

What follows from verse 23 is more relevant to the destruction of Jerusalem. It will be a particularly difficult time for women who are pregnant or nursing. It will be a time of great distress. Many will be cut down and others will be led away into captivity to pagan territories. (The Romans liked to parade their prisoners in a victory march in Rome.) The holy city itself, its Temple in ruins, will be trampled on by the Gentiles - a fate it still experiences.

This will happen “until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled”. For, as Paul indicates in his letter to the Romans (11:25-29), it is the Gentiles who have taken the place of the Jews as the bearers of the Good News and the builders of the Kingdom. But Paul believed that the age of the Gentiles would only end with the return of Israel and the reconciliation of all in Christ Jesus as Lord. It is an indefinite period and it is still in process. Our God is an all-inclusive God. And a patient God.

Finally, Jesus speaks of various cataclysmic and apocalyptic signs to signal the end of time. They are typical biblical phenomena and not meant to be taken as exact foretelling of events. They conclude with Daniel’s vision of the Son of Man riding on a cloud coming with great power and glory. It is not intended to fill people with fear and trembling, except perhaps those who have lived wicked lives.

But for the disciples, the loyal followers of Jesus, it is a time to “stand up straight and raise your heads, for your redeeming is near at hand”. As we saw in yesterday’s Gospel, sufferings and tribulations are part and parcel of living the Christian life to the full. Our message and our vision is a ‘sign of contradiction’, a beacon of light to many and to others a threat to be radically uprooted.

But for those who have tried to live by the vision and values of the Gospel, for those who have tried to seek and find Jesus in all the people and events of their lives, who have spent hours with him in intimate dialogue, it is the time of their final liberation, a time when there will be no more sorrows, no more tears, no more hardships, no more disappointments. Rather, they will be entering an unbroken time of love and intimacy, of freedom and peace, of joy and consolation.

So, as we approach the end of another liturgical year, we do so on an upbeat note.

Week 34 | Friday

FIRST READING (Daniel 7:2-14)

For our last two readings from Daniel we go to the second half of the book (chaps. 7-12) which consists of four visions of Daniel expressed in what seems to us strange and obscure language. This is the apocalyptic style in which symbols and exotic images, used to describe apparently past events, are in fact conveying a prophetic message of hope to people living under oppression and persecution. It is a kind of code language only fully understood by the initiated.

We will be taking only one of these visions (from chapter 7) followed tomorrow by an interpretation of its meaning.

This first vision, known as the Vision of the Beasts, comes to Daniel as he lies in his bed. It is the first year of the reign of King Belshazzar.

The vision will correspond to the dream of Nebuchadnezzar in which he saw a huge statue made of different metals. To the four succeeding world kingdoms, Babylonian, Median, Persian, and Greek, is opposed the messianic kingdom of the people of God. The four metals (the kingdoms) of the dream, shattered by the stone breaking off from the mountain are now represented by four beasts succeeded by the Son of Man. The imagery of this chapter is used extensively in the Book of Revelation, where it is applied to the Roman empire, the persecutor of the early church.

As the vision opens, Daniel sees the four winds of heaven stirring up the Great Sea. This refers to the world of nations and peoples. In its original sense, the term ‘great sea’ was the primordial ocean beneath the earth, according to the cosmological structure of the world in ancient times. This sea was thought to contain various monsters, and in particular mythological monsters symbolising the chaos which God had vanquished at the time of the Creation (Genesis 1). But here Daniel speaks of a different kind of chaos, a spiritual and moral chaos, in the world.

Four great beasts now emerge from this ‘sea’, each one different from the other. Beasts are chosen because the insignia or symbols of many nations were represented by beasts or birds (think of the American eagle or the Russian bear).

The first beast is like a lion with eagle’s wings and, as the visionary watches, the wings are torn off and it stands up like a human and with a human heart. The winged lion represents the Babylonian empire, as this was a common motif in Babylonian art. The two wings plucked off represent Kings Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar, who were both removed from their thrones. (Is Babylon also represented by the lions in the den with Daniel? They are rendered impotent by God’s protection of his servant, Daniel.) Does the standing up and having a human heart (the seat of reason) reflect the two kings’ positive reactions to Daniel’s predictions, even though they did not favour them?

The second beast is like a bear, rising up on one side, with three bones (ribs or tusks?) in its mouth between its teeth. A command is heard: “Up! Eat quantities of flesh!” The second beast represents the Medes, who are seen by the author as the immediate successors to the Babylonians. The three tusks in its mouth symbolise its destructive nature. Hence the command to devour flesh. The three ribs/tusks may also represent the three principal conquests of the Medes: over Lydia (546 BC), Babylon (539) and Egypt (525).

The third beast is like a leopard with four bird’s wings and four heads, to whom dominion is given. This is the Persian empire. The winged leopard represents the swiftness with which Cyrus establishes his kingdom. The four heads correspond to four Persian kings. The three kings who follow Cyrus are uncertain, since there were more than three Persian kings between Cyrus and the collapse of the empire. The fourth, however, seems to be Xerxes I (486-465 BC), the great campaigner against Greece (e. g. the famous battles of Thermopylae and Salamis). However, another commentator sees in the four heads the four main divisions into which Alexander’s empire fell after his untimely death in 323 BC: Macedon and Greece (under Antipater and Cassander), Thrace and Asia Minor (under Lysimachus), Syria (under Seleucus I), Palestine and Egypt (under Ptolemy I).

The fourth beast, described as “fearful, terrifying, very strong” is normally identified with the Greek kings, Philip of Macedon and his famous son, Alexander the Great, who conquered the whole of West Asia and even reached as far as India. It differs from the others in that it came from the west (Macedonia) rather than from the east (Babylonia, Persia, etc). This beast has iron teeth, eats its victims, crushes them and tramples their remains. It differs from the other beasts in having 10 horns. The horns represent the kings of the Seleucid dynasty formed after Alexander’s death when his empire was divided among his top generals. This is the part which particularly concerns the author.

While the visionary looks at the horns, he sees another little horn sprouting from the others. Three other horns are pulled out to make way for it. This refers to Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who caused so much suffering to the Jews and who came to power only after getting rid of several rivals to the throne. This horn has eyes like human eyes and a mouth full of arrogance. This refers to the blasphemous tongue of Antiochus.

The text now moves into poetic form as it describes a very different vision. As the visionary watches, thrones are set in place. These are for judges. According to ancient Jewish tradition (the Book of Enoch), the saints of God are privileged to sit in judgement at God’s side. Later, the promises of Jesus are even more explicit. In Matthew, Jesus tells his disciples: “You who have followed me shall likewise take your places on twelve thrones to judge the twelve tribes of Israel” (Matt 19:28).

Then the Ancient One takes his seat. This is a vision of the heavenly throne of God (the “Ancient One”), who sits in judgement over the nations. He has an appearance of pure whiteness, of absolute perfection: “His robe as white as snow, the hair of his head as pure as wool”. The throne itself is flames of fire with burning wheels. It recalls the divine chariot described in the first chapter of Ezekiel. A stream of fire pours out from his presence. Around the throne are innumerable courtiers (angels?), “a thousand thousand. ten thousand times ten thousand.”

“The court of judgement was in session and the books lay open.” These are the records of people’s actions, both good and bad. There are many references to these in both the Old and New Testaments. The idea is central to the hymn, Dies irae, once used in Requiem Masses. One verse reads:

Liber scriptus proferetur,

in quo totum continetur,

unde mundus judicetur.

(The written book shall be brought forth, in which all is contained, from which the world will be judged.)

As Daniel continues to watch, “because of the noise made by the boastings of the horn, the beast was put to death, its body destroyed and committed to flames”. The ‘boastings of the horn’ refer to the blasphemous arrogance of Antiochus. He is destroyed and his body committed to the flames. The other empires, however, are given a reprieve for an indeterminate period. They are no longer a threat to the faithful, once God’s people cease to be subject to them.

Now comes the climax of the vision. As he gazes into the visions of the night, the visionary sees, “coming on the clouds of heaven, as it were a son of man”.

In contrast to the worldly kingdoms opposed to God, which appear as beasts, the glorified people of God that will form his kingdom on earth is represented in human form. Just as our Lord applied the figure of the stone hewn from the mountain to himself (cf. Tuesday’s reading), he also made the title, “Son of Man” his most characteristic way of referring to himself, as the One in whom and through whom the salvation of God’s people would come to be realised. The term “son of man” simply means a human person but, from the description, this “son of man” is someone very special and points - in Daniel - to the expected Messiah, the King and Liberator of suffering Israel.

This text is the first reference to the Messiah as the Son of Man. He will be enthroned as ruler over the whole earth (previously misruled by the four kingdoms mentioned), and his kingdom “will never be destroyed”, whether on earth or in the life to come. In Mark’s gospel, during the trial before the Sanhedrin, Jesus says to the high priest: “You will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of the Power and coming with the clouds of heaven” (Mark 14:62) - a clear reference to today’s passage.

The son of man is now led into the presence of the Most Ancient One. On him is conferred “rule, honour and kingship” while all nations and peoples of every language serve him.”His rule is an everlasting rule. and his kingdom will never come to an end.” This is clearly a reference to the Messiah-Christ, the Saviour King who will come in the person of Jesus. But Daniel is speaking in terms of hope; he does not yet know who the Messiah is going to be.

We know but that is not enough. We need to come to know our Messiah personally and not just know about him. We have to make him truly the King and Lord of our life and follow him along the Way he has shown us.

GOSPEL (Luke 21:29-33)

Jesus continues his admonitions about readiness for the future. The key is to watch out for the telling signs.

Just as with the fig tree or any tree, the emerging buds of green indicate that summer is on the way. When the things Jesus has been mentioning are seen to happen, terrible as some of them seem to be, they are in fact the sign of summer.”The Kingdom of God is near.” On other occasions, Jesus had said that the Kingdom was already present but the Kingdom can be seen in different ways. The Kingdom is present wherever the values of the Gospel are being lived but it will not be fully realised until the very end when all are gathered in Him.

“This generation will not pass away until all these things have taken place.” When Jesus says that “this present generation” will not have passed away until all this takes place, it is not to say that Jesus’ final coming will happen in the lifetime of his hearers, as some imagined but rather that, with his own suffering and death, the new and eternal dispensation which he inaugurates with the Kingdom will be under way. Ironically, the fulfilment of Jesus’ prophecy is inaugurated by the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the Temple. It inaugurates a new presence of God in the world, a presence in “spirit and in truth”.

However, Jesus’ words could also mean that the Jewish people as a race (here referred to as “this generation”) will continue to exist till the end of time, to the final coming of Jesus.

Lastly, the world in which we live will one day disappear, but the words of Jesus, words of Truth and Life will be forever valid, because they represent a vision of life and those timeless values which we understand as emanating from God and to which every single human being is innately called.

As we come to the end of the Church year it is a time for us to make our decision whether we want to belong to the kingdom that Jesus is inaugurating and not only to belong but also to make its spread our life’s work. Then, no matter when he comes to call us, we are ready.

Week 34 | Saturday

FIRST READING (Daniel 7:15-27)

Our last reading from the book of Daniel is an interpretation of the vision that we read yesterday.

Daniel says that he is deeply troubled and alarmed by the visions he has had of the four beasts and the ‘son of man’. So he approaches “one of those standing by” for an explanation. One of those standing by must refer to one of the thousands of angels serving at the throne of the Ancient One.

Daniel then receives an explanation of what he has seen. The four beasts represent four kings who will emerge. But those who receive real power are the “holy ones of the Most High”, namely, God’s holy people. It is they who will receive true kingship, which will last forever.

Daniel then asks about the fourth beast, who is different from all the others with iron teeth and bronze claws and who ate its victims before crushing them and trampling on their remains. In yesterday’s reading we saw that this fourth beast represented the kingdom of Macedonia with King Philip followed by his famous son, Alexander the Great, who swept all before him and reached as far as India with his armies.

Daniel also asks about the ten horns on the fourth beast’s head, which we saw represented the 10 kingdoms which emerged after Alexander’s death, and also about the extra horn which sprouted and displaced three of the original horns. This extra horn we saw represents the Seleucid King Antiochus IV, who wiped out his rivals on the way to power.

Daniel asks why this horn has eyes and a mouth full of arrogance and looks more impressive than its counterparts. This is the horn which is making war on the “holy ones”, in other words, the Jewish people. He is proving to be the stronger until the Ancient One comes and passes judgement in favour of the “holy ones”, when the time comes for them to assume kingship.

In response to Daniel’s questions the angel (in the name of God) replies:

The fourth beast is the fourth dynasty and different from all the others. It will devour the whole world, trample it underfoot and crush it. Compared to the other dynasties, the short reign of Alexander was extraordinary (he died in his 30s) in conquering territories from Macedonia to Egypt, from Syria to India.

As already explained, the ten horns are the ten kingdoms which emerged (not necessarily at the same time) after the death of Alexander when the territories he conquered were divided among his leading generals. But, after them, comes another, who is different from them, and who seizes power by ousting three other claimants to the throne. This, of course, is Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the scourge of the Jews and who is the real focus of interest in all these stories in Daniel. He is the king we saw last week in the readings from Maccabees.”He will insult the Most High and torment the holy ones of the Most High.” He is the one who planned to “alter the seasons and the Law”. In other words, he tried to ban the Jewish Sabbath and feast-days and to get Jews to abandon the Law and follow the king’s hellenising policies, which they regarded as idolatrous.

And so, says the angel to Daniel, “the Saints will be handed over to him for a time, two times, and half a time”. This strange expression is not as obscure as it sounds. The word ‘time’ here represents one year. Hence, when added up, we get three and a half years, which corresponds to the length of the persecution the Jews experienced under Antiochus. As ‘seven’ is a perfect number in Scripture, half of that implies great imperfection. The book of Revelation calculates the same period as 42 months or 30 days each, totally 1,260 days (Rev 11:2-3). However, in Revelation it is persecution in the Roman Empire which is being spoken about. In all these texts, as throughout Daniel, the figure stands for a period of distress allowed by God for a limited time after which there will be relief for the faithful.

Finally, comes the message of hope.”The court will sit” - that is the court mentioned yesterday over which the Ancient One presides in majesty. Then “he”, that is, Antiochus will be stripped of his royal authority and reduced to nothing.

Then the “kingship and rule and the splendours of all the kingdoms under heaven” will be given to the “holy ones” of the Most High. His power is eternal and one which every other empire must serve and obey.

(Incidentally, the Aramaic version of the book ends here; from chapter 8 to the end was written in Greek.)

Considering that these words were written in the midst of persecution and before the successful revolt of the Maccabees, they represent a great spirit of hope and confidence in the outcome and in God’s protection. Nor were they to be disappointed. Antiochus did indeed fall.

Later Jesus will come and inaugurate the kingdom which begins with him and will last forever. This is a kingdom of which we, too, sincerely hope to be a part. This messianic vision was one which the author never saw realised himself. We now have our Messiah-King in Jesus Christ. He is the “Son of Man” who now sits at the right hand of the “Ancient One”, the Father. And, as the reading predicts, we share in Christ’s kingship. Through our baptism we become, with Christ and in Christ, priest, prophet and king. They are three titles which we must take seriously and which we must realise are to become active in the lives of every single Christian.

Because, as has been said here more than once before, the guarantee of our future is how we perform in the present, how we respond to the call of our King. And that is the principal lesson as we arrive at the end of this liturgical year.

And, so it is on that confident note of hope and expectancy, which we know to have been fulfilled in the person of Jesus, that we come to the end of our Scripture readings for this year.

GOSPEL (Luke 21:34-36)

Our final reading from Luke (and this Church year) continues the messages of warning that he has been giving during the week.

The warning is not to become immersed in a life of self-centred indulgence and hedonism nor to be overcome by many worries and anxieties. It is these two things which can dominate the lives of so many: a combination of escapism from what is difficult and a running to activities where happiness is confused with pleasure.

The “great day” is going to close in like a trap - quickly and without previous warning.”The day I speak of will come upon all who dwell on the face of the earth.” Of course, for every single one of us, that “great day” in practice is the day on which we will be called individually to face our Lord and Creator.

(One might ask, What do we do while we are waiting for the rest of the world to join us? Perhaps we should remember that ‘on the other side’ it is an eternal Now, with no past or future. It is like going to the hub of a wheel from any part of the rim. All converge together in the same place.)

So we are warned to be permanently on the watch. To pray constantly for strength to avoid what is bad for us and that we may be able to stand secure when we come face to face with the Son of Man. In some ways, the demands are very simple, although we find them difficult at times - showing our fidelity to God by a loving concern for the well-being of every other person, but especially those most in need.”As often as you did it to the least of these my brothers and sisters, you did it to ME.”

Whatever the circumstances of our life we look forward in confidence to the ultimate victory of God, of Jesus and of the Kingdom. As has been said here more than once, the best preparation for that unpredictable moment of leaving this world is to live as fully as we can in the presence of our always-present God. Let us seek him, find him and respond to him in every single person and in every single experience of our daily lives.

“O Lord, grant that all my thoughts, intentions, actions and responses may directed solely to your love and service this day and every day.” Amen.